Godson v. Greer
- Citation
- (1920) 60 SCR 653
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 2 November 1920
- Posture
- Appeal (agency/contract) / Final Appeal Judgment
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of Canada
- Decision
- 2 November 1920
- Posture
- Appeal (agency/contract) / Final Appeal Judgment
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The appeal was dismissed because the respondent continued to render services accepted by the appellant and materially assisted in effecting the transfer; those continuing and accepted services entitled the respondent to the commission despite subsequent dealings by another broker.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Court of Appeal for British Columbia and trial court affirmed.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Judgment for respondent affirmed
02
Material facts
Parties
Godson
Appellant Counsel: A. H. MacNeil K.C.Greer
Respondent Counsel: Eug. Lafleur K.C.Amounts and remedies
- Judges Count: 5
- Report Volume: 60
- Report Page: 653
- Months Between Agreement and Sale: 9
03
Procedural history
Posture
Appeal (agency/contract) / Final Appeal Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether a plaintiff agent is entitled to commission where the ultimate purchaser was introduced to the principal through other brokers after a chain of communications
- 02
Whether continued services by the original agent accepted by the principal give rise to a right to commission despite an intermediate broker concluding the direct negotiation
- 03
Effect of sub-agents and passing enquiries on entitlement to commission
- 04
Degree of causal contribution required to constitute procuring the sale
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant submitted that no commission was owing because the purchaser was obtained by another broker who dealt directly with the appellant after a chain of passing enquiries, breaking any causal link to the respondent; consequently the respondent did not procure the sale.
- Respondent
- Respondent submitted that he continued to render services which were accepted by the appellant up to the time of sale and materially assisted in obtaining government consent to transfer the ship; those continuing and accepted services entitled him to the commission.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Common law agency principles as applied by the Supreme Court of Canada in Godson v. Greer (1920) 60 S.C.R. 653
An agent who continues to provide services accepted by the principal and who materially contributes to enabling the transfer is entitled to the agreed commission even if another broker later completes the direct negotiation.
- 02
Supreme Court of Canada judgment in Godson v. Greer (1920) 60 S.C.R. 653
A break in the chain of passing enquiries does not automatically deprive an earlier agent of a right to commission if the agent's efforts remain operative and are accepted by the principal.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the respondent continued to render services accepted by the appellant and materially assisted in effecting the transfer; those continuing and accepted services entitled the respondent to the commission despite subsequent dealings by another broker.
Obiter and limits
- The lapse of time (about nine months) between initial agreement and the final arrangement did not per se defeat the respondent's claim.
- Passage of the introduction through a series of brokers does not automatically extinguish the original agent's claim where the agent's services remain effective and accepted by the principal.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Court of Appeal for British Columbia and trial court affirmed.
- Appeal dismissed with costs
- Judgment for respondent affirmed
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of Canada · 2 November 1920
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Supreme Court of Canada
Judgment· 2 November 1920
Godson v. Greer Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1920-11-02 Report (1920) 60 SCR 653 Judges Davies, Louis Henry; Idington, John; Duff, Lyman Poore; Anglin, Francis Alexander; Mignault, Pierre-Basile On appeal from British Columbia Subjects Agency Decision Content Supreme Court of Canada Godson v. Greer, (1920) 60 S.C.R. 653 Date: 1920-11-02 Godson v. Greer. 1920: October 26; 1920 November 2. Present: Sir Louis Davies C.J. and Idington, Duff, Anglin and Mignault JJ. ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA. Principal and agent—Sale of ship—Commission. APPEAL from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia[1] affirming the judgment of the trial judge, Clement J. and maintaining the respondent's, plaintiff's, action. The appellant promised the respondent a commission if respondent made sale of a ship. The respondent employed a broker as sub-agent who mentioned the matter to another broker and it was passed on through others until, about nine months after the agreement with the respondent, a broker to whom the matter was mentioned came to the appellant and made an arrangement directly with him resulting in a purchaser being obtained. The respondent however continued his services, which were accepted by the appellant, up to the time of sale, and was of assistance in procuring the government's consent to a transfer of the ship to a foreign registry. The Supreme Court of Canada, having heard counsel and reserved judgment, dismissed the appeal. Appeal dismissed with costs. A. H. MacNeil K.C. for the appellant. Eug. Lafleur K.C. for the respondent. [1] [1920] 2 W.W.R. 217.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.