Summary of proceedings to date
July 2025
The High Court declined an FMA application for new search warrants relating to digital material previously seized, while confirming that the existing search warrants remain lawful.
The Court also struck out a claim brought by an investor in Du Val Property Group Limited that alleged the FMA owed duties of care to individual investors. The Court reaffirmed that the FMA is required to carry out its role in the public interest and does not owe duties of care to individual investors.
Related Judgments:
August 2024
The High Court placed Du Val entities into interim receivership at the FMA’s request, approved interim asset preservation orders and appointed John Fisk, Stephen White and Lara Bennett as interim receivers.
On the advice of the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs given in accordance with the FMA’s recommendation, the Governor‑General placed certain Du Val entities into statutory management under the terms of the Corporations (Investigation and Management) Act 1989. John Fisk, Stephen White and Lara Bennett were appointed as the statutory managers.
The FMA’s recommendation was based on its own investigation and a report provided to the Court by the interim receivers.
March 2023
The FMA issued a formal public warning to Du Val Capital Partners Limited (DVCP), the general partner of the Du Val Mortgage Fund Limited Partnership, and Du Val Group as the FMA was satisfied that DVCP and Du Val Group may have breached financial markets legislation by engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct, or conduct that is likely to mislead or deceive investors in the Du Val Mortgage fund, in relation to dealing in financial products.
Related formal warning:
October 2022
The FMA issued a formal warning to DVCP and Du Val BTR GP Limited following a review of wholesale property investment offers after noting an increase in complaints and concerns about how these offers were being promoted and whether they were being offered to appropriate investors.
Related formal warning:
July 2022
The High Court upheld the FMA’s direction order issued in October 2021, confirming that the FMA was entitled to conclude Du Val’s risk and fee representations were misleading.
Du Val argued that the FMA made a legal mistake by not accepting that wholesale investors are generally more sophisticated and able to assess the offer themselves. Du Val’s offer used the wholesale investor exclusion in the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (FMC Act). The wholesale exclusion is designed for investors considered more highly experienced and/or well-resourced (such as investment institutions). The Court agreed with the FMA that the FMC Act was intended to protect all investors and there are varying degrees of sophistication and experience among wholesale investors.
October 2021
The FMA issued a direction order requiring Du Val to remove advertising in relation to its Mortgage Fund Limited Partnership which the FMA considered likely to mislead or deceive investors over the level of risk and fees associated with the fund.
Du Val appealed the FMA’s decision to the High Court.
Related direction order
Background
