2 total
Appeal dismissed; buyers unjustly enriched by cutting out real estate agent to save on commission.
The appellants, four individuals who purchased a property, appealed a Small Claims Court decision ordering them to pay $24,478.63 in real estate commissions to the respondent real estate agent and brokerage.
The appellants argued the Deputy Judge erred in finding an enforceable oral agreement and in applying the principles of unjust enrichment, as no Buyer Representation Agreement was signed.
The Divisional Court dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the Deputy Judge's factual inferences that the appellants deliberately cut the respondents out of the transaction to save on commission, thereby unjustly enriching themselves.
Appeal of Small Claims Court order to pay real estate commission dismissed; unjust enrichment finding upheld.
The appellants appealed a Small Claims Court decision ordering them to pay $24,478.63 in real estate commissions to the respondents.
The appellants argued the Deputy Judge erred in finding an enforceable oral agreement and in applying the principles of unjust enrichment after they purchased a property using the seller's agent instead of the respondents.
The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the Deputy Judge's factual inferences or application of the law of unjust enrichment.
