Simeon Property Pty Ltd v Chadban; Chadban v Simeon Property Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATCD 156

Simeon Property Pty Ltd v Chadban; Chadban v Simeon Property Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATCD 156

Simeon introduced Ms Zhang to the property and promoted its benefits, but its actions were not an effective cause of the sale. No offer was made during Simeon's agency period, Simeon made minimal efforts after Mr Jones resigned, the Chadbans validly terminated Simeon's open agency agreement, Stone arranged the second inspection, and all price negotiations leading to the accepted $3,100,000 sale occurred after Stone's agency commenced. Clause 2 of Simeon's agency agreement was therefore not enlivened and the Chadbans were not liable to pay Simeon's claimed commission.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Consumer Claim Concerning Licensed Real Estate Agent Commission Under the Property and Stock Agents Act 2002 (nsw) / Principal Judgment After Hearing in the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales
Outcome
Claim for commission by Simeon Property Pty Ltd was not allowed; Alexandra Chadban and David Chadban were declared not liable to pay the claimed commission.
Legal Topics
['licensed Real Estate Agent Commission' 'open Selling Agency Agreement' 'sale of Residential Property' 'effective Introduction of Purchaser' 'effective Cause of Sale' 'review of Commission and Fees']
['consumer Law' 'property Law' 'agency Law'] ['licensed Real Estate Agent Commission' 'open Selling Agency Agreement' 'sale of Residential Property' 'effective Introduction of Purchaser' 'effective Cause of Sale' 'review of Commission and Fees']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Consumer Claim Concerning Licensed Real Estate Agent Commission Under the Property and Stock Agents Act 2002 (nsw) / Principal Judgment After Hearing in the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Simeon Property Pty Ltd, during the agency period ending 6 September 2019, effectively introduced Ms Zhang to the property so as to enliven its contractual right to commission under clause 2 of the open selling agency agreement dated 14 May 2019.' 'If Simeon Property Pty Ltd was entitled to commission, whether the commission claimed should be held not payable or reduced because the whole or part of the amount was not reasonable under s 36(4)(b) of the Property and Stock Agents Act 2002 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

Simeon introduced Ms Zhang to the property and promoted its benefits, but its actions were not an effective cause of the sale. No offer was made during Simeon's agency period, Simeon made minimal efforts after Mr Jones resigned, the Chadbans validly terminated Simeon's open agency agreement, Stone arranged the second inspection, and all price negotiations leading to the accepted $3,100,000 sale occurred after Stone's agency commenced. Clause 2 of Simeon's agency agreement was therefore not enlivened and the Chadbans were not liable to pay Simeon's claimed commission.

Court Disposition

Claim for commission by Simeon Property Pty Ltd was not allowed; Alexandra Chadban and David Chadban were declared not liable to pay the claimed commission.

Orders

  • ['Alexandra Chadban and David Chadban are not liable to pay to Simeon Property Pty Ltd the commission fee of $68,200 claimed by Simeon Property Pty Ltd pursuant to the agency agreement dated 14 May 2019.' 'Any costs application is to be made in writing to the Tribunal within 21 days of the date of this decision.'...