Foxtons Ltd v Pelkey Bicknell & Anor

Foxtons Ltd v Pelkey Bicknell & Anor

Foxtons were not entitled to commission because they did not introduce Mrs Low as the eventual purchaser; the introduction must be to the purchase, not merely to the property, and on the facts, Hamptons' activities were the effective cause of the sale.

Parties
Respondent: Foxtons Limited; Appellant: Treld Bicknell; Appellants: Pelkey Bicknell & Anr
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for the defendant (Mrs Bicknell)
Legal Topics
Estate Agency Commission, Interpretation of Agency Contracts, Implied Terms, Effective Cause Doctrine

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Foxtons Limited

Respondent

Treld Bicknell

Appellant

Pelkey Bicknell & Anr

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether Foxtons were entitled to commission under their sole agency contract for the sale of Mrs Bicknell's house to Mrs Low
  2. 2 Proper construction of the phrase 'a purchaser introduced by us' in the agency contract
  3. 3 Whether Foxtons' introduction was the effective cause of the sale

Ratio Decidendi

Foxtons were not entitled to commission because they did not introduce Mrs Low as the eventual purchaser; the introduction must be to the purchase, not merely to the property, and on the facts, Hamptons' activities were the effective cause of the sale.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for the defendant (Mrs Bicknell)

Orders

  • HHJ Williams’s order set aside
  • Judgment entered for the defendant