H.M.T. Realty Corp. v. Federal Business Development Bank, (1990) 41 O.A.C. 71 (DC)

• Judge: O'Driscoll, Southey and Craig, JJ.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: September 06, 1990
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1990), 41 O.A.C. 71 (DC)

HMT Realty Corp. v. FBDB (1990), 41 O.A.C. 71 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of an Action in the District Court of Ontario at Sault Ste-Marie, Ontario as No. 3841/87

H.M.T. Realty Corporation (plaintiff/appellant) v. Federal Business Development Bank (defendant/respondent)

(No. 929/88)

Indexed As: H.M.T. Realty Corp. v. Federal Business Development Bank

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Divisional Court

O'Driscoll, Southey and Craig, JJ.

September 13, 1990.

Summary:

The plaintiff real estate broker claimed a commission on the sale of property in which the defendant bank was the vendor. The trial judge dismissed the action. The broker appealed.

The Ontario Court of Justice, General Division (Divisional Court), allowed the appeal.

Brokers - Topic 4044

Compensation - Right to compensation - Loss of right - Expiry of agreement - A listing agreement was stated to expire on October 15, 1984, but contained an overholding clause whereby a commission would be paid if a sale of the property occurred within one year thereafter to anyone who was made aware of the property through the activities of the real estate agent - Although an agreement of purchase and sale was entered into within the period of the overholding clause, it remained conditional until after the clause expired - The transaction was not closed until well after the period of the overholding clause - The Ontario Divisional Court held that a commission was payable (upon completion), even though the agreement was conditional.

Counsel:

Ronald Birken, for the plaintiff/appellant;

Michael S. O'Neill, for the defendant/respondent.

This appeal was heard before O'Driscoll, Southey and Craig, JJ., of the Ontario Court of Justice, General Division (Divisional Court), on September 6, 1990. The decision of the Divisional Court was delivered orally by Southey, J., and released on September 13, 1990.