Cases - Saleh v Robinson
Record details
- Name
- Saleh v Robinson
- Date
- [1988]
- Citation
- 2 EGLR 126
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Estate agency - Rent Act 1977
- Summary
-
The plaintiff was looking for a new flat. She was introduced to an estate agent who informed her she would have to pay £12,000 for a flat occupied by the defendant. The estate agent, who was regarded by the court as agent for the defendant, informed the defendant that all that could be obtained for the flat was £10,000. So when the plaintiff paid over £12,000 to the agent, £2,000 'stuck in the pockets' of the agent. The defendant surrendered his tenancy to the landlord who, after some difficulty, accepted the plaintiff as tenant.
The Court of Appeal held that the payment was an illegal premium under section 119(1) of the Rent Act 1977 and was recoverable from the defendant under section 125. At first instance, the judge had held that only £10,000 was recoverable from the defendant. However, the Court of Appeal held that the defendant was liable for the entire £12,000 (less £200 being a valid payment for carpets and curtains) because the estate agent was acting within the scope of his authority when he accepted the £12,000. He was not simply employed to market the defendant's flat. He appeared to the plaintiff to be the ostensible agent of the defendant, apparently acting on his behalf in asking for £12,000 and arranging for the transfer of the tenancy. In these circumstances, he was acting within the scope of his authority.
[Note: No reference was made by the court to the decision in Navarro v Moregrand Ltd, above. Note that the £2,000 kept by the agent appears to have been a secret profit, recoverable by the defendant.]