Wakefileds Real Estate (Pty) Ltd v Attree and Others (17185/05) [2010] ZAKZDHC 3 (10 February 2010)

Wakefileds Real Estate (Pty) Ltd v Attree and Others (17185/05) [2010] ZAKZDHC 3 (10 February 2010)

The court found that there was no express or tacit agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants regarding commission, as there was no unequivocal conduct or evidence supporting such an agreement. The plaintiff's introduction of the purchaser was not the effective cause of the sale, as the purchasers were not able to buy at the time of the initial introduction and only became able and willing after a significant price reduction and changes in their financial circumstances. The sale was ultimately concluded through the efforts of the competing agent, Mrs de Marigny, who negotiated the lower price and commission. The cumulative effect of these factors outweighed the plaintiff's initial...

Citation
[2010] ZAKZDHC 3
Parties
Plaintiff: Wakefields Real Estate (Pty) Limited; Defendant: Gavin Wayne Attree; Defendant: Tracey Attree; Third Party: Fiona Isobel Howard
Court
Kwazulu-Natal High Court, Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
10 February 2010
Case Number
17185/05
Procedural Posture
Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claim dismissed; costs awarded as specified.
Judges
Nicholson
Legal Topics
Estate Agency Commission, Tacit Agreement, Effective Cause of Sale, Joinder of Third Party, Costs Award
Commercial and Corporate Civil Procedure Estate Agency Commission Tacit Agreement Effective Cause of Sale Joinder of Third Party Costs Award

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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wakefields Real Estate (Pty) Limited

Plaintiff

Gavin Wayne Attree

Defendant

Tracey Attree

Defendant

Fiona Isobel Howard

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Trial / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff had an express or tacit agreement entitling it to commission for the sale of the property.
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was the effective cause of the sale to the third party.
  3. 3 Whether the defendants were liable to pay commission to the plaintiff.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there was no express or tacit agreement between the plaintiff and the defendants regarding commission, as there was no unequivocal conduct or evidence supporting such an agreement. The plaintiff's introduction of the purchaser was not the effective cause of the sale, as the purchasers were not able to buy at the time of the initial introduction and only became able and willing after a significant price reduction and changes in their financial circumstances. The sale was ultimately concluded through the efforts of the competing agent, Mrs de Marigny, who negotiated the lower price and commission. The cumulative effect of these factors outweighed the plaintiff's initial...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claim dismissed; costs awarded as specified.

Orders

  • The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
  • Plaintiff is ordered to pay first and second defendant's costs.