Cases - Millar, Son & Co v Radford

Record details

Name

Millar, Son & Co v Radford

Date

(1903)

Citation

19 TLR 575

Keywords

Estate agency - commission

Summary

The defendant employed the plaintiffs to find a purchaser, or failing a purchaser, a tenant. The plaintiffs introduced a person who took a 7-year lease and were paid commission accordingly. After the tenant had been in possession for about 15 months he bought the freehold from the defendant.

The defendant claimed this was the result of fresh and independent negotiations between himself and the purchaser.

The plaintiffs claimed the sale commission less the letting commission. They contended that they had a continuous retainer, not an alternative retainer, and that the only reason that the purchaser had not purchased originally was that he did not have the funds at the time. The judge found no evidence of a contract so the plaintiffs appealed.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Lord Collins MR said that there must be a contract to find a purchaser or a continuous retainer; there was neither. He also stated that it was not sufficient merely to show that the agent's action was an indispensable cause (causa sine qua non). It was necessary to show that the introduction was an efficient cause in bringing about the letting or the sale.