Cases - John McCann & Co v Pow

Record details

Name

John McCann & Co v Pow

Date

[1975]

Citation

1 AII ER 129

Keywords

Estate agency

Summary

The defendant appointed the plaintiffs to act as estate agents in the sale of his flat. The plaintiffs described themselves as sole agents on their advertisements of the flat. They sent particulars of the property to another firm of estate agents but withheld the vendor's name and telephone number. The second agents copied out the particulars but put their own name to them. The purchaser found out about the flat from the second agents. As these agents did not know the name and address of the vendor, an employee telephoned the plaintiffs for this information and passed it on to the purchaser. He then went to view the property. When asked if he had come from the plaintiffs, he informed the defendant that he had not and that he had come privately. So the defendant assumed he could deal directly free of commission. When the plaintiffs discovered that the purchaser had been sent by the second agents, they claimed commission on the basis that the second agents were their subagents.

The Court of Appeal held that the defendant was not liable for the commission, as the plaintiffs had no authority to appoint a subagent. The court stated that there is no implied authority to appoint a subagent, because an estate agent holds a position of discretion and trust. The court rejected the submission for the plaintiff that there was only a limited form of subagency restricted to ministerial duties. Lord Denning said that '... functions and duties of an estate agent, certainly of a sole agent, require personal skill and competence.'