Outerbridge trading as Century 21 Plateau Lifestyle Real Estate v Hall [2020] NSWCA 205

Outerbridge trading as Century 21 Plateau Lifestyle Real Estate v Hall [2020] NSWCA 205

The appeal was dismissed because the actions of the first agent, though significant, were not the effective cause of the ultimate sale. The first agent’s involvement ended when he became uncontactable and the prospective purchaser’s interest lapsed, and the sale was revived and completed by the second agent’s intervention. Thus, the appellants were not entitled to commission under the agency agreement terms.

Parties
First Appellant: Noel Outerbridge trading as Century 21 Plateau Lifestyle Real Estate; Second Appellant: Lynette Outerbridge trading as Century 21 Plateau Lifestyle Real Estate; First Respondent: Brian Richard Hall; Second Respondent: Marlene Ann Bentino
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Appeal (post District Court Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Real Estate Agent Commission, Non Exclusive Agency, Effective Cause of Sale, Introduction of Purchaser
Contracts Property Law Real Estate Agent Commission Non Exclusive Agency Effective Cause of Sale Introduction of Purchaser

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Noel Outerbridge trading as Century 21 Plateau Lifestyle Real Estate

First Appellant

Lynette Outerbridge trading as Century 21 Plateau Lifestyle Real Estate

Second Appellant

Brian Richard Hall

First Respondent

Marlene Ann Bentino

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Appeal (post District Court Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants were the effective cause of the sale and entitled to commission under the agency agreement
  2. 2 Whether the actions of a second agent affect entitlement to commission
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in factual or legal analysis regarding 'effective cause'

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the actions of the first agent, though significant, were not the effective cause of the ultimate sale. The first agent’s involvement ended when he became uncontactable and the prospective purchaser’s interest lapsed, and the sale was revived and completed by the second agent’s intervention. Thus, the appellants were not entitled to commission under the agency agreement terms.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Extension of time for filing Notice of Appeal granted up to and including 30 March 2020
  • Appeal dismissed