In this decision, the Federal Supreme Court had to determine whether a broker who had merely identified the buyer could nevertheless claim commission after a second broker completed the transaction. The Federal Supreme Court considered that the second agreement concluded between the client and the first broker only amended
A contract for the renovation and sale of a property by an architect stated that the sale price “could” fall within a specified range. This clause, when properly interpreted, did not make the architect’s entitlement to fees contingent on achieving a minimum sale price. In the absence
A broker was held liable for breach of contractual obligations to his client by failing to disclose relevant information regarding the potential sale of his client’s apartment at a higher price.
