The house seems destined to be passed from one unwitting buyer to the next until it finds an owner who does not believe in ghosts.
The disciplinary tribunal calls this a grey area and its advice to agents is that every case should be treated on its merits. Barfoots, which still believes it made the right decision in this case, would have preferred a more definitive ruling. The best the Real Estate Agents Authority can suggest is that time is a consideration - an incident a year earlier would worry a buyer more than one a decade before.
Barfoots might yet appeal to the High Court. It might find the judiciary more worldly about human misfortune and less sympathetic to the view that a building can be held to account for anything that has happened within its walls.
Otherwise, where might this principle end? Will agents need to check with neighbours of all listed houses in future, to ensure that nothing in the behaviour of the previous occupants could cause a buyer to regret buying the place? Will they be expected to call in exorcists? It happens, evidently. A priest told the Herald he has performed blessings after a death that have given home owners a "sense of peace".
A more rational exercise might be to remind the haunted that every house that changes hands has a history seldom known to its current occupants. A house is our most personal space but it was previously just as personal to others. Quite likely it has accommodated death at some time.
If that unwelcome truth causes an irrational market resistance, must agents pander to it? They should be held to account for real estate, not phantoms.