Nottingham v The Real Estate Agents Authority

Case [2023] NZSC 51

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW ZEALAND

I TE KŌTI MANA NUI O AOTEAROA
 SC 128/2022
 [2023] NZSC 51
BETWEEN

DERMOT GREGORY NOTTINGHAM, PHILLIP RAYMOND NOTTINGHAM AND ROBERT EARLE MCKINNEY
Applicants

AND

REAL ESTATE AGENTS AUTHORITY
First Respondent

MARTIN RUSSELL HONEY
Second Respondent

Court:

Winkelmann CJ, O’Regan and Kós JJ

Counsel:

Applicants in person
S S McMullan and M Djurich for First Respondent
D W Grove for Second Respondent

Judgment:

11 May 2023

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

A        The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

BThe applicants must pay costs of $1,250 to each of the respondents.

____________________________________________________________________

REASONS

  1. The applicants apply for leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal.[1]  In that judgment, the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicants’ appeal to that Court.  The Court also allowed the cross‑appeal of the second respondent, Mr Honey, set aside the decision of the High Court under appeal reinstating the applicants’ appeals in the Real Estate Agents Tribunal and reinstated the Tribunal’s decision striking out the applicants’ appeals to the Tribunal.[2]

  2. The applicants’ appeal to the Court of Appeal was brought under s 120 of the Real Estate Agents Act 2008.  Section 120(3) provides: “[t]he decision of the Court of Appeal on any appeal under this section is final”.

  3. This Court’s jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals in civil proceedings in the Court of Appeal is governed by s 68 of the Senior Courts Act 2016.  Section 68 provides:

    68       Appeals against decisions of Court of Appeal in civil proceedings

    The Supreme Court may hear and determine an appeal by a party to a civil proceeding in the Court of Appeal against a decision made in the proceeding, unless—

    (a)an enactment other than this Act makes provision to the effect that there is no right of appeal against the decision; or

    …

  4. Section 120(3) of the Real Estate Agents Act is a provision to the effect that there is no right of appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal made under s 120.  Accordingly, this Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal in the present case.

  5. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

  6. The applicants must pay costs of $1,250 to each of the respondents.

Solicitors:
Meredith Connell, Auckland for First Respondent
Foy & Halse, Auckland for Second Respondent


Details
AGLC
Nottingham v The Real Estate Agents Authority [2023] NZSC 51
Case
[2023] NZSC 51
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Nottingham v The Real Estate Agents Authority involved the applicants, Nottingham, appealing a decision of the Court of Appeal concerning their complaint about the conduct of a real estate agent. The Real Estate Agents Authority was the respondent, having upheld the agent's conduct. The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court, which was tasked with determining whether it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal under the provisions of the Senior Courts Act 2016.

The primary legal issue was whether the Supreme Court had the authority to hear the appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal, given the specific statutory provisions that precluded such appeals under the Real Estate Agents Act. The Court needed to interpret the relevant sections of the Senior Courts Act and the Real Estate Agents Act to ascertain if there was a right of appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal.

The Court found that Section 120(3) of the Real Estate Agents Act explicitly stated there was no right of appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal made under that section. Given this statutory provision, the Court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed, and the applicants were ordered to pay costs of $1,250 to each of the respondents.

No further orders were made by the Court, as the dismissal of the appeal was due to a jurisdictional bar. The applicants were left with no avenue for appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision, as provided by statute.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

This Court’s jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals in civil proceedings in the Court of Appeal is governed by s 68 of the Senior Courts Act 2016. Section 68 provides:68 Appeals against decisions of Court of Appeal in civil proceedingsThe Supreme Court may hear and determine an appeal by a party to a civil proceeding in the Court of Appeal against a decision made in the proceeding, unless—(a)an enactment other than this Act makes provision to the effect that there is no right of appeal against the decision; or… Section 120(3) of the Real Estate Agents Act is a provision to the effect that there is no right of appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal made under s 120. Accordingly, this Court does not have jurisdiction to hear and determine an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal in the present case. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. The applicants must pay costs of $1,250 to each of the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.