PHOTO: Janet Dickson. FILE
Auckland real estate agent Janet Dickson recently faced the High Court in Wellington, challenging the compulsory nature of the Te Kākano cultural training programme for real estate agents. The 90-minute course, focusing on Māori culture, language, and te Tiriti o Waitangi, was made mandatory by the Real Estate Agents Authority (REAA) as part of continuing professional development (CPD) for 2023.
Dickson refused to take the course, citing it as a “matter of principle,” arguing that it would not add value to her performance and conflicted with her personal beliefs. As a result, the REAA was required to cancel her license for five years under the Real Estate Agents Act 2008. Dickson’s application for an exemption was declined, prompting her to seek a judicial review against the REAA, the Registrar of Licensed Real Estate Agents, and the Associate Minister of Justice in June 2024.
Real Estate Agent Loses Court Battle Over Mandatory Māori Course
On Tuesday, Justice Helen McQueen dismissed Dickson’s judicial review, stating that both the REAA’s decision to make the course mandatory and the Registrar’s refusal to grant an exemption were legal and valid. However, this does not imply that the court agreed with the REAA’s decision to require the course. It simply means the decision was made through a reasonable, legal, and valid process.
Understanding Judicial Review
In judicial review cases, courts focus on the decision-making process rather than the decision itself. As Victoria University senior lecturer of public law, Eddie Clark, explains, “Judicial review is not an appeal. It is about whether the decision-maker properly understood the law, considered all the required factors, and followed fair process.”
To succeed in her case, Dickson needed to prove that the REAA’s decision-making process was illegal, improper, or unreasonably made. However, Justice McQueen found no such issues in the process.
Facebook goes NUTS over a kiwi real estate agent losing his license
The Claims and Court’s Findings
Dickson’s case involved three claims. First, she argued that the REAA’s Practice Rules, which require real estate agents to complete at least 10 hours of CPD annually, were invalid. She claimed that mandatory courses should be specified in the rules themselves, subject to community consultation and ministerial approval. Justice McQueen disagreed, stating that the Real Estate Agents Act gave the REAA broad powers to set CPD topics and that listing mandatory courses on their website was practical and necessary.
Second, Dickson argued that the decision to make Te Kākano mandatory was unnecessary to protect consumers and inconsistent with her right to freedom of expression. Justice McQueen ruled that the REAA is not limited to mandating courses solely necessary to protect consumers but can also promote and protect consumer interests. She concluded that Te Kākano did promote and protect the interests of Māori working with real estate agents and did not infringe on Dickson’s freedom of expression.
Conclusion
Justice McQueen dismissed the case, affirming the legality and validity of the REAA’s decision-making process. While the ruling does not mean that the court agrees with making the Te Kākano course mandatory, it acknowledges that the decision was made within the bounds of the law.
SOURCE: STUFF