A & B Herbert CC t/a Herbert Properties v Dick (59/2010) [2012] ZAWCHC 236 (14 December 2012)

A & B Herbert CC t/a Herbert Properties v Dick (59/2010) [2012] ZAWCHC 236 (14 December 2012)

The Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that it introduced the purchaser, Bernard Schafer, to the Defendants or to the property, or that it was the effective cause of the sale. The evidence showed that Bernard was already familiar with the property and had engaged in negotiations with the Defendants prior to and after the exclusive mandate period. The Plaintiff's witnesses, particularly Byron Herbert, were unconvincing and unable to substantiate the claim of introduction or effective cause. There was no credible evidence of marketing efforts or introduction by the Plaintiff that led to the sale. The Defendants' version, supported by Bernard and Mr Schafer Senior, was...

Citation
[2012] ZAWCHC 236
Parties
Plaintiff: A & B Herbert CC t/a Herbert Properties; Defendant: Clive William Dick; Defendant: Denise Juliette Jacqueline Dick
Court
Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
14 December 2012
Case Number
59/2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Final Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim A and alternative claim B are dismissed with costs.
Judges
Le Grange
Legal Topics
Estate Agent Commission, Exclusive Mandate, Effective Cause, Breach of Contract, Repudiation, Sale of Immovable Property
Commercial and Corporate Land and Property Estate Agent Commission Exclusive Mandate Effective Cause Breach of Contract Repudiation Sale of Immovable Property

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A & B Herbert CC t/a Herbert Properties

Plaintiff

Clive William Dick

Defendant

Denise Juliette Jacqueline Dick

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Plaintiff was the effective cause of the sale of the Defendants' property to Bernard Schafer.
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff is entitled to estate agent's commission or damages for breach or repudiation of the exclusive mandate.
  3. 3 Whether the Defendants breached or repudiated the exclusive mandate agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The Plaintiff failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that it introduced the purchaser, Bernard Schafer, to the Defendants or to the property, or that it was the effective cause of the sale. The evidence showed that Bernard was already familiar with the property and had engaged in negotiations with the Defendants prior to and after the exclusive mandate period. The Plaintiff's witnesses, particularly Byron Herbert, were unconvincing and unable to substantiate the claim of introduction or effective cause. There was no credible evidence of marketing efforts or introduction by the Plaintiff that led to the sale. The Defendants' version, supported by Bernard and Mr Schafer Senior, was...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim A and alternative claim B are dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim A and the alternative claim B are dismissed with costs.