Bundshuh v Finnegan

• Jurisdiction: South Africa
• Judge: Vos J and Fagan AJ
• Judgment Date: 04 November 1974
• Citation: 1975 (1) SA 376 (C)
• Hearing Date: 28 October 1974
• Court: Cape Provincial Division

Vos, J.:

Appellant was defendant in the magistrate's court. Plaintiff sued defendant for commission on a written mandate to sell her house. The magistrate awarded plaintiff R900 with costs, and defendant appeals. I shall refer to the parties as in the magistrate's court.

Plaintiff had obtained a mandate from defendant reading:

"Mandate to sell

H I hereby give you permission to offer for sale my property known as

293 Main Road, Sea Point

for the sum of R30 000 or such sum as is subsequently agreed upon by me and the purchaser. This sum includes brokerage as laid down by the Institute of Estate Agents, namely 5 per cent on first R6 000 and 2½ per cent thereafter.

I further agree to grant you exclusive selling rights until sale is successfully negotiated."

Thereafter plaintiff procured a written offer by one Laughton to purchase the property for R30 000, but defendant refused to accept the offer and declined to sign it. Plaintiff sued for R900 as being the loss which he

Vos J

had sustained. In this Court Mr. Ipp, for appellant, defendant below, submitted that on the authority of Gluckman v Landau & Co., 1944 T. P. D. 261, and Brayshaw v Schoeman en Andere, 1960 (1) SA 625 (AD), an ordinary mandate to sell given to an agent was not fulfilled until a sale had been concluded A and that the production of an offer to purchase was not due fulfillment. Mr. Scott, who appeared for respondent, plaintiff below, rightly did not contest this proposition. In Brayshaw's case VAN BLERK, J. A., said at pp. 629H - 630D:

"Dit wil egter nie sê nie dat gewysdes waardeur dergelike bewoorde opdragte uitgelê is nie hier insiggewend kan wees nie, insoverre dit op algemene oorwegings steun vir 'n besondere B uitleg daarvan. So is dan ook vir die motivering van die Gluckman saak ruim steun gevind in die benadering gevolg in die saak van Luxor (Eastbourne) Ltd. and Others v Cooper, 1941 A. C. 108. In laasgenoemde saak is die stelling neergelê dat waar eiendom by agente ingegee word om kopers daarvoor te kry dan is die ooreenkomste, wat daardeur ontstaan,

'merely promises binding on the principal to pay a sum of money on the happening of a specified event, which involves the rendering of some service by the agent'.

C Met hierdie stelling as uitgangspunt het Regter MURRAY in die Gluckman saak in die eerste instansie hom ten taak gestel die vasstelling van hierdie spesifieke gebeurtenis, ten einde te bepaal of kommissie betaalbaar is voor en...