PHOTO: Mike Pero Real Estate was bought by Australian operation Raine & Horne a year ago. Photo: Supplied
A major legal dispute is brewing in New Zealand’s real estate industry as a battle over the rebranding of high-profile real estate agencies plays out in court. The case, involving Mike Pero Real Estate, its new Australian owners Raine & Horne, and franchisees who refuse to rebrand, is shaping up to be a defining moment in the franchise sector.
The Background: Mike Pero’s Takeover by Raine & Horne
In March 2023, Australian real estate giant Raine & Horne acquired Mike Pero Real Estate, a well-known New Zealand real estate brand. The acquisition was intended to expand Raine & Horne’s footprint in the Kiwi market, bringing its branding and business model to the franchise network.
However, not all franchisees were happy with the takeover. Some refused to transition to the Raine & Horne brand, leading to a heated legal battle over contractual obligations, branding rights, and franchise agreements.
Australian real estate brand Raine & Horne expands into New Zealand
The Franchisee Rebellion: The Case of Normans Road Real Estate
One of the key players in this dispute is Kristina Briggs, the director of Normans Road Real Estate, a former Mike Pero Real Estate franchise. Briggs rejected the rebrand, arguing that the transition to Raine & Horne was a repudiation of the franchise agreement.
She terminated the agreement with Mike Pero and continued operating under a new company, asserting her right to maintain independence. However, Raine & Horne fought back, claiming that:
✔️ The rebrand was a standard business transition
✔️ Franchisees were contractually obligated to adopt the new branding
✔️ Refusing to rebrand constituted a breach of agreement
The High Court Ruling: A Win for the Franchisee
In September 2024, Raine & Horne sought an interim injunction against Briggs and Normans Road Real Estate, attempting to enforce restraint of trade provisions and stop them from operating independently.
However, the High Court sided with Briggs, declining the injunction. The judge emphasized the principle of overall justice, ruling that an interim injunction would unfairly prevent Briggs and her company from trading.
This decision marked a significant win for franchisees, reinforcing that franchise agreements must be upheld fairly and that rebranding efforts cannot be unilaterally forced upon unwilling franchisees.
Raine & Horne’s Appeal: A Setback in Court
Not satisfied with the ruling, Raine & Horne filed an appeal—arguing that they had the legal right to enforce the rebrand. However, the Court of Appeal struck down their case, stating that Raine & Horne needed to first obtain leave to appeal from the High Court before moving forward.
The decision was clear:
🛑 “Without the prior grant of leave, this Court has no jurisdiction to hear the appeal.”
This ruling was yet another blow to Raine & Horne’s efforts to bring reluctant franchisees under their brand umbrella.
Franchise Industry Experts Weigh In
Sally McKnight, General Manager of Franchise NZ, warned that cases like this could have serious repercussions for franchise networks.
She referenced a similar case a decade ago, when Club Physical gym franchises rebranded three Auckland locations without warning, leading to court injunctions.
According to McKnight:
📌 Franchise networks depend on brand consistency
📌 Sudden terminations and rebrands can weaken the network’s overall business model
📌 Legal disputes over branding can create uncertainty for both franchisees and franchisors
However, in this case, Raine & Horne only targeted one franchisee with legal action, rather than taking broader steps to enforce rebranding across the entire network.
What This Means for Real Estate Franchises in NZ
The Mike Pero vs. Raine & Horne dispute could set a legal precedent for how franchise agreements are interpreted and enforced in New Zealand’s real estate industry.
🔹 For Franchisees: This case suggests that franchise agreements may not always guarantee a forced rebrand, especially if the court sees it as a fundamental change to the business relationship.
🔹 For Franchisors: Companies looking to acquire and rebrand existing franchises may face legal resistance if franchisees are unwilling to comply.
🔹 For Real Estate Clients: The ruling creates uncertainty around established brands, as independent operators could continue under different names rather than consolidating under a single franchise.
What’s Next?
Raine & Horne could attempt to refile their appeal, but they must first gain approval from the High Court. If unsuccessful, they may need to reassess their strategy for transitioning Mike Pero Real Estate into their brand.
Meanwhile, franchisees like Kristina Briggs and Normans Road Real Estate may continue to operate independently—raising questions about the long-term unity of the former Mike Pero network.
One thing is clear: this case has shaken up the real estate franchise model in New Zealand, and the outcome will have lasting implications for how franchise agreements, rebrands, and ownership transitions are handled in the future.
SOURCE: RNZ