Event and Time
Event Description
- Case Name: Savills (NSW) Pty Ltd v. ATF CTH Pty Ltd
- Key Date: Amended statement of claim filed on 26 March 2018
- Summary: Savills (NSW) Pty Ltd claimed commission for selling property as an exclusive agent for ATF CTH Pty Ltd, citing an alleged agency agreement. The dispute centered on whether a contract existed and the definition of "Property" within that contract, as well as claims of unconscionable conduct by the defendant.
Application and Claims
- Plaintiff's Claims:
- Claimed commission based on an alleged agency agreement. - In the alternative, sought damages for unconscionable conduct, arguing that the defendant led them to believe they were the exclusive agent for the property sale.
- Defendant's Claims:
- Denied any concluded agreement or contract with the plaintiff. - Asserted that if an agreement existed, its terms did not entitle the plaintiff to commission. - Argued that there was no unconscionable conduct and that plaintiff failed to prove any loss.
Judicial Decisions
- Decision: Judgment for the defendant.
- Costs: Ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant's costs unless a different costs order was applied for within 7 days.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Plaintiff's Arguments:
- Existence of an agency agreement entitling them to commission. - The defendant's actions were unconscionable as they implied exclusivity without a formal agreement.
- Defendant's Arguments:
- No written agreement was concluded, undermining the plaintiff's claim. - Even if an agreement existed, the terms did not support the claim for commission. - Claimed that the evidence was insufficient to demonstrate any loss from alleged unconscionable conduct.