Overseas investment decision for case 200520068 - Worldwide Leisure Limited

To acquire:

1. an estate or interest in land which together with any associated land exceeds 0.4 hectares and includes/adjoins land that exceeds 0.4 hectares which is provided as a reserve, a public park, for recreation purposes, or a private open space; and
2. an estate or interest in land which together with any associated land exceeds five hectares in area.

The application has been approved as it met the criteria.

The Overseas Investment Office is satisfied that the Applicant has business experience and acumen relevant to and is demonstrating financial commitment towards the investment. The Overseas Investment Office is further satisfied that the persons who exercise control over the Applicant are of good character and not the kind of persons referred to in section 7(1) of the Immigration Act 1987.

The Applicant has operated a luxury lodge known as Huka Lodge since 1985. The Applicant acquired the freehold of the subject property which is adjacent to the Huka Lodge property in 2003 (refer 200320009/D2003200025). The Applicant stated that it is critical to the continued success of Huka Lodge that any development of the adjoining property be of a similar character, scale intensity and be presented in a similar fashion to the Lodge site. The Applicant proposes to develop the subject property as an enhancement/extension of Huka Lodge.

This application is for consent for the Applicant to acquire an interest as mortgagee in the subject land on 30 July 1998. Consent was not sought at the time due to an oversight. At the time of the acquisition it was doubtful whether Mr van Heeren (the shareholder of the Applicant) was ordinarily resident in New Zealand. The acquisition by the Applicant of the interest in land as mortgagee secured the basis upon which the right of first refusal of the freehold as a process was administered. The original agreement for sale and purchase of the Huka Lodge property contained a right of first refusal for the subject property but no process was prescribed for this purpose. The parties could not agree upon the basis by which the right of first refusal was exercised. The ANZ bank, as mortgagee of the property, commenced proceedings to exercise a mortgagee sale of the subject property. The Applicant purchased the mortgage to protect its right of first refusal and to enable agreement as to how the right of first refusal was exercised.

The interest as mortgagee was acquired by the Applicant so as to secure the first right of refusal in respect of the freehold. The acquisition of the subject property reflects the Applicant's intention to expand its luxury tourist lodge business in New Zealand.