A High Court order that daughter Pei-Ya Liao surrender ownership of an Auckland house to her parents was only the start. Entitled to compensation for costs of construction, Pei-Ya said contract terms for the fixed price build is sufficient evidence. Her parents want evidence of actual costs. With the build carried out by a company part-owned by Pei-Ya’s husband, her parents are suspicious that side-deals saw the build completed for much less than the contract price, reducing compensation payable.
Their compensation dispute followed litigation commenced back in 2021, resulting in a High Court ruling that a property on White’s Way in Ellerslie was held in trust by Pei-Ya for her parents.
They had provided cash to buy a bare section, with title taken in Pei-Ya’s name to circumvent rules prohibiting foreign nationals from owning residential land. D&T Homes Ltd, a company controlled by her husband, built a house on the site, paid for by Pei-Ya and her spouse.
Ownership was disputed. Pei-Ya claimed the land was gifted to her; part of a family arrangement, she says. At the time, she owned at least two other investment properties.
The High Court ruled there was no gift; Pei-Ya held the Ellerslie property in trust for her parents. While having to surrender the property, she was entitled to compensation for the cost of building a house on the bare section, the court ruled.
Her parents demanded proof of actual costs.
Builder D&T Homes refused to release any detail.
Pei-Ya’s husband said their Ellerslie build took place during the covid-19 pandemic. Building materials were in short supply. D&T Homes scavenged stock from multiple sources, which was stored in bulk, and then used across several building sites with no detailed records kept allocating supply costs across various jobs.
Justice van Bohemen ordered D&T Homes disclose all relevant accounting information necessary to determine ‘actual costs’ of the Ellerslie build.
The fact D&T Homes as builder is closely linked to Pei-Ya makes made full disclosure necessary. He cautioned against D&T Homes making unnecessary redactions to invoices, obscuring suppliers’ details.
Information provided is to be kept confidential, Justice Bohemen said.
D&T Homes alleges that if this information is made widely available, Pei-Ya’s brother would improperly use this information in operating his rival construction business.
Liao v. Liao – High Court (7.11.25)
26.006