000			01563cab a2200217 4500
001			ABS43406
008			090401t1990 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
035			_a(Sirsi) u41576
041			_aeng
245			_aPeter Yates and Co v Bullock and another
260			_c1990
350			_a0
490			_aEstates Gazette _v(1990) 37 EG 75-81(4)
520			_aCA 16 May 1990. Appeal by Y, a firm of estate agents , from a County Court decision dismissing their claim for commission against B. The claim was in respect of the sale of a hotel in Blackpool . Y had received instructions to sell the hotel with a commission agreed at 1.5%. Eventually an offer was made by a Mr and Mrs Duxbury (D) which was rejected by B on the advice of Y. Meanwhile B instructed another firm of estate agents, (K) to whom he gave sole selling rights . He did not terminate Y`s agency. After about a month K reported to B that they had sold the hotel to D and a Mrs Hume. Contracts were exchanged, the sale was completed and B paid K the agreed commission. B refused to pay Y who issued the writ in the present proceedings, claiming the same amount of commission. Cc dismissed the claim and Y appealed. CA held, allowing the appeal, that the fact that Y did not actually introduce Mrs Hume was of little importance. She was introduced by D, not by K.
650			_aEFFECTIVE CAUSE
650			_aESTATE AGENTS' COMMISSION
650			_aPETER YATES AND CO V BULLOCK AND ANOTHER
690			_aMANAGEMENT-BUSINESS MANAGEMENT-PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
942			_n0
948			_c04/03/1997
999			_c26689 _d26689