Magistrate's Court.

Taranaki Herald, Volume L, Issue 11978, 28 May 1902, Page 2

Magistrate's Court.

. . . ♦ i THIS DAY. I MOORE AND SCOTT V. MACKAY. } Mr R. L. Stanford gave judgment in i the following commission case, evidence, etc., in which was heard at Stratford recently His Worship said : — The facts in this case are as follows : — A Mr Petera having leased his farm through plaintiffs' agency was asked by them ou ; January 10th whether he would purchase another farm, to which he replied "Yes; if they have everything suit ble." Plaintiffs' among other farms offered Mr Peters the farm of defendant which he had on his (plaintiffs') books, though up to that time (Januuy 10th) he had not been directly authorised by the defendant to sell the farm. The particulars entered in plaintiffs' book were inaccurate in two important particulars, an inaccuracy to be accounted foe by tha fact that the particulars were obtained not from the owner but from one Culhberlson, a drover, who was not proved to have been an agent for the defendant. It was agreed on both sides that the plaintiffs were not authorised to sell until Jan. 10 th, and Mr Moore said that on that day he told defendant that he (Moore) had a buyer f-*rf -*r Mackay's farm, and that defendant ia reply said I suppose you know the price ; that Moore said ' Yes ; £$," and that defendant -then said, "Fire away." Mr Peters, it seems, had been a near neighbour to defendant's farm; and bad for some time been desirous of buying it ; that on three separate occasions he had gone to Stratford to try and see defendant about the farm, and had only failed to see him and negotiate, because on one occasion defendant bad .been in Auckland and on anourer at Kaponga. It id clear, therefore, that plaintiff cannot claiaa to have introduced a buyer ; Peters, indeed, in reply to the question, " Would you have bought Mackay's farm if you had not seen Moore ?" replied " Yes." It is clear therefore that plaintiffs must fail od a claim for commission, but this leaves the question of a quantum meroit undisposed of. On January 10th Peters was in plaintiff's office discussing the pur chase of Mackay's farm, and prepared to giva L 5 an. acre. Moore went out and found Mackay and brought him to his office, and for two hours the parties discussed the question of price and terms, arriving at last at the price of £5 10s an acre, which Peters was willing to give and ■ ackay to take, but no final agreement was arrived at on January 10ih as to the amount of cash to be paid. On January 11th further negotiations took place, and Mackay said that he wanted the sum of over £1300, the amount of the first mortgage, paid in cash, the amount of cash required being £1043. The question then arose how this was to be j financed. Moore took some notes and said he thought he could manage it. Tha next morning, however, Mackay . and Peters went to Mr N. King, who financed the buyer to t le satisfaction of all parties It was srguad that . became Moore did not' fiud the requisite amount of cash which was necessary to complete the sale he could not therefore claim commission, but this argument seems to arise from a confusion of ideas between the duties of a commission and a loan .- gent. The duties of a commission agenttr j over when he has introduced a buyer :ni arranged terms with the seller, and put either party in a position to demand specific performance, and it is no part of his duty to supply the purchase uioney. A caretul examination of all h> facts leads one to tb6 conclusion that while Moore cannot gst commission o i tbe * a c he is entitled to something for what itu did on Jan. 10 and LI, after he was authorised' by Mackay on Jan. 10 th to go on. He practically arranged the te-ma of tbe tale in the presence of the seller and buyer, and the seller having taken advantage of* his work must expect to have to pay for „ that work. I value his work at the sum of £15, and judgment will be for ithe plaintiff for £15, and costs x 3 sa. Messrs Wright and Hutch en appeared for Moore and Scott, and Mr bhaiier Western for the defendant, Mackay.