Just south of Auckland City boundary, Pokeno has mushroomed in size with a frenzy of residential construction. Looking to profit, Annie Shiu separately negotiated with Robert Luo and Anny Yip to buy neighbouring land suitable for rezoning. Annie’s motives were questioned in the High Court. She is currently on bail, forbidden from contacting her fellow investors.
The High Court was told Xiaoling Shiu (known as Annie Shiu) approached Robert Luo in late 2016 with plans to develop rural land west of Pokeno. It was agreed Mr Luo would put $4.6 million into the joint venture with profits split after rezoning and subdivision approval from Waikato District was obtained for both the land purchased and adjoining land on Munro Road Annie Shiu had separately agreed to buy. Munro Road had no road frontage but had excellent commercial potential if subdivided in conjunction with Mr Luo’s joint venture land.
At a later date, Annie Shiu had Ms Yip agree to a similar proposal; Ms Yip would buy land also neighbouring Munro Road which would then be incorporated into a new residential subdivision for their mutual benefit with profits shared.
Mr Luo and Ms Yip only learnt later that they were both part of Annie’s overarching subdivision plans. The two joined forces after both fell out with Annie, alleging she had no intention of honouring their separate joint venture agreements. In particular, they allege Annie plans to sell Munro Road without completing the promised rezoning and subdivision. The High Court was told Annie made an initial two million dollar down payment on Munro Road with final payment of ten million dollars due in May 2020. Obtaining finance may prove difficult. Fearing Annie will sell and scupper subdivision plans, Mr Luo and Ms Yip sued asking the High Court to block any sale of Munro Road. Justice Lang refused. Mr Luo and Ms Yip had no rights to or over Munro Road. Annie was free to sell, if need be. If proved at a subsequent trial that Annie made promises that all the properties would be subdivided in tandem, any proved loss is due in damages, he ruled.
Luo v. Shiu – High Court (23.03.20)
20.064