Tua loses round 1 of property battle, rematch on cards

Heavyweight boxer David Tua has lost the first round of a battle against his estranged managers over ownership of a $7.55 million coastal property at Pakiri in Northland, but may yet bounce back.

The High Court at Auckland yesterday rejected an application by the fighter for a declaration that his management company, Tuaman Inc, bought the 51.7ha block in 2001 to be held in trust for him and his family .

Tua told the High Court in February that he put the property purchase through Tuaman, of which he owns half, on the advice of business manager Martin Pugh that this would be better for tax purposes.

But Pugh and Tua's other former manager, ex-boxing champion Kevin Barry, are fighting for a right to half the Pakiri land through their 25 per cent shares in the company.

Justice Hugh Williams, in a decision yesterday, noted that Tua put nothing in writing to convey any intention for the land to be held in trust for him alone.

And even when he should have been alerted to the possibility that the land was not being held wholly for him, such as when he found out that both he and Pugh had to guarantee a bank loan, he raised no objection and did nothing about it.

Justice Williams did, however, raise the possibility that Tua may yet through some other legal route be found entitled to a share in the land "conceivably even up to 100 per cent".

He directed lawyers for the two sides to confer by phone next month on "how to proceed towards resolution" of the case.

Justice Williams said Tua impressed him as a genuine and sincere witness who took satisfaction from his success in the boxing ring but who recognised his limitations in understanding the complexities of company and trustee law.

Of Pugh, he said "on the matters in issue in this hearing he presented as a far from convincing witness".

He noted an acknowledgment by Pugh of having signed other people's names to formal documents and said there was little doubt his management of Tuaman's finances "fell well short of his statutory obligations".

He accepted an accountant's evidence that Tuaman Inc's records were confused to the point of being meaningless.