Ronald Preston and Partners v Markheath Securites plc
Language: English Series: Estates Gazette ; (8831) 6 August 1988, 57-63(4)Publication details: 1988Subject(s): Summary: QBD 30 March 1988. The plaintiffs (R), a firm of estate agents and the defendants (M), a property developer were engaged in negotiations for the purchase of a building and its adjacent land. R was acting as agents for the vendors and was assured that he would be retained as M`s agents. R claims that at a meeting in December 1980 it was agreed that their fee should be 10% of the first year`s rent, irrespective of who let the property, and on the sale of the property after letting 3% of the price realised as a project management fee. They also claimed that if M decided not to sell the property they were still to be paid the 3% of what the property would have fetched. The property was let by M without the assistance or knowledge of R and was not sold. M offered R no fee. The court held in favour of M although showing great sympathy for R, on the basis that no binding agreement had been made.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | ABS39663 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 18118-1001 |
QBD 30 March 1988. The plaintiffs (R), a firm of estate agents and the defendants (M), a property developer were engaged in negotiations for the purchase of a building and its adjacent land. R was acting as agents for the vendors and was assured that he would be retained as M`s agents. R claims that at a meeting in December 1980 it was agreed that their fee should be 10% of the first year`s rent, irrespective of who let the property, and on the sale of the property after letting 3% of the price realised as a project management fee. They also claimed that if M decided not to sell the property they were still to be paid the 3% of what the property would have fetched. The property was let by M without the assistance or knowledge of R and was not sold. M offered R no fee. The court held in favour of M although showing great sympathy for R, on the basis that no binding agreement had been made.