CLAIM FOR COMMISSION

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 190, 7 May 1919, Page 8

CLAIM FOR COMMISSION

AN INTERESTING CASE. At the Magistrate's Court yesterday, Herbert Charles Stoddart und Alexander M'Neill Proctor, land agents, proceeded against Frederick William Bradshaw, settler, of lihandallah, to recover tlio sum of ,£2B 15s. as commission for services rendored in the sale of a property at Kliandallah valued at .£950. Plaintiffs stated- that Bradshaw had notified them that lie had a property for sale and asked plaintiffs to-arrange a sale, A returned soldier required the property and a sale ivas arranged under the Government's scheme for advancing money to returned 6oldiers for the purpose of purchasing property, but shortly after this arrangement defendant's solicitor notified plaintiffi? that tho deal was oil'. Mr. F. V. Frazer, S.M.,was on tho bench. Mr. ■ it. 14. Evans appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr. J. M. Dale for tho defendant. Defendant gave evidence to tho effect that he understood that tho transaction was to bo a cash one. He was not'aware that the buyer proposed to apply to tho Government for a loan under the discharged soldiers scheme in. order to buy the property. The plaintiffs in-' formed liim that it would take seven weeks to settle the deal, and this was not satisfactory to defendant. Tho uncertainty of tlio loan being granted and the certainty that he would havo to wait seven weeks for the money caused defendant to break off negotiations. He was quite prepared to effect the sale for cash. For the 1 defence, Mr. J. M. Dalo said that no sale was effected. His olient had understood that it was to be o. cash transaction, but when he found that tho pnrchaso-money was to consist of a grant from the Government and there was i.-o certainty of tho grant being made, he decidcd to withdraw the property from sale. The letter of defendant writton to plaintiffs was not sufficient authority for plaintiffs to succeed on their claim for commission. Mr. Evans said that as far as section '13 of the Land Agents Act was concerned tho letter written by Bradshaw to the plaintiffs was undoubtedly an authority for plaintiffs to arrange for tho salo of his property. Defendant had admitted that.he desired a sale to bo effected. v His Worship said that the" case presented interesting aspects end tliere was lit conflict of evidence on the important points. The parties appeared to be quite honest regarding the wholo business. To 'his mind the first two paragraphs of Biacishaw's letter were a clear authority to Stoddart and Proctor lo arrange a iJale. A reasonable interpretation of tho letter implied authority for plaintiffs io N.lroduce a purchaser. Unless there was an authority for plaintiffs to sell, tlio agents' duty concluded when they introduced a purchaser. His Worship went on to compare the present tnsc with tho cases cited by counael in different lights, ami said that ho •"could not see that the agents had introduced a purchaser of financial stability who was willing to purchase under tlio conditions required by tho defendant. Plaintiffs would 'be nonsuited.