Domb v Real Estate Agents Authority

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND WELLINGTON REGISTRY

CIV-2015-485-000160 [2016] NZHC 954

IN THE MATTER OF
an Application pursuant to section 3 of the

Declaratory Judgments Act 1908

BETWEEN

LUKE DOMB Plaintiff

AND

REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY Defendant

Judgment: 12 May 2016

SUPPLEMENTARY JUDGMENT (No. 2) OF COLLINS J

[1] This judgment addresses the parties’ requests for further clarification of the

forms of the declarations set out in my supplementary judgment of 22 April 2016.

[2] I refer to the memorandum of counsel for the defendant dated 26 April 2016 and the memoranda in response from the plaintiff dated 29 April and 12 May 2016.

[3] By consent, I vary the terms of paragraph [19](1) of my judgment of 22 April

2016. The Registrar is able to require applicants for a licence (or renewal of a licence) to consent to the disclosure by the police of any records of findings of liability for an enforcement offence which carries a maximum penalty of $10,000 or more.

[4] I also vary by consent the terms of paragraph [19](2) and (3) to make it clear that the threshold for infringement offences (for pending charges and discharges/diversion) is a maximum penalty of $10,000 or more.

[5] My judgment of 22 April 2016 has been redistributed to reflect these changes.

DOMB v REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY [2016] NZHC 954 [12 May 2016]

[6] Having considered the submissions of both parties on costs in relation to the substantive proceeding, I have decided that both parties exceeded and failed in their arguments to varying degrees. Ultimately, I have decided the overall interests of justice is served by allowing costs to lie where they fall. There is accordingly no
order for costs in this proceeding.

D B Collins J

Solicitors:
Simpson & Co, Mana for Plaintiff
Meredith Connell, Auckland for Defendant

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Luke Domb initiated legal proceedings against the Real Estate Agents Authority, seeking further clarification on the forms of declarations set out in a previous supplementary judgment. The High Court of New Zealand, Wellington Registry, was tasked with addressing the clarifications requested by both parties. The primary legal issues before the court were the interpretation and application of the Declaratory Judgments Act 1908 in the context of the Real Estate Agents Authority's licensing requirements and the disclosure of records by the police.

The court carefully considered the submissions from both parties, focusing on the specific requests for amendments to the previous judgment. By mutual consent, the court varied the terms of the judgment to clarify that the Registrar could require applicants for a licence to consent to the disclosure of records of findings of liability for enforcement offences with a maximum penalty of $10,000 or more. Additionally, the court adjusted the threshold for infringement offences, aligning it with the specified penalty amount. These changes were intended to provide clarity and ensure that the licensing requirements were accurately reflected in the judgment.

In summary, the court provided the requested clarifications by amending the earlier judgment to specify the conditions under which the Registrar could require disclosure of records and to establish the threshold penalties for various offences. The adjustments were made by consent and aimed to align the judgment more closely with the parties' submissions. As a result of the proceedings, the court decided that neither party would bear the costs associated with the substantive proceeding, allowing costs to lie where they fall.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established