Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LAW REPORTS

COURT OF APPEAL A LAND AGENTS COMMISSION. The Court of Appeal yesterday heard an appeal brought direct from the Magistrate's Court undei- section 68 of tho Judicature Act, 1908. The- appellants, I'ercy Kdmund Knyvett and Robert Pratt, licensed land agents, ivero plaintiffs in the court below, and' tho rcspondeut, Robert Leonard Suisted, was defendant. The action in tho Magistrate's Court was brought for the recovery of a balance of commission on an exchange of property. On tho property there were two mortgages, which wero fully disclosed with tho instructions to soil or exchange, and throughout tbo transactions wero allowed for.' Tho question to bo decided was whether commission was payablo on the tolal value of the property, or on its value above, tho mortgages. It was contended by tho plaintiffs' that if commission, could bo claimed only ou tho surplus abovo incumbraiices, an agent might have littlo or nothing to , get ou the salo of a property' heavily mortgaged. On the other hand, the defendant pointed out that in such a case the seller, if he iiad to pay commission on tho total value, without taking the mortgages into consideration,- might havo to pay the agont ae commission more than he received for his interest. Tho total valuo of the property here sold was JMB74, and commission at 2i per cent, was claimed on that. Deducting the mortgages, tho value would bo ,£2634. On this, commission had already been paid. Tho magistrate, Mr. J. W. Poynlon, S.M., gave judgment for the defendant, and again6t. thie decision ■ tho appeal to the higher Court was made. Sir John Findlay, K.C., and Jlr. D. R. Eoggard appeared for "the .appellants, and Mr. T. Young for the respondent. The Court heard argument, and reserved its judgment.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19171011.2.84

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 14, 11 October 1917, Page 9

Word Count
294

LAW REPORTS Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 14, 11 October 1917, Page 9

LAW REPORTS Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 14, 11 October 1917, Page 9

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert