Newman v Anserdoro Pty Ltd

Newman, a real estate agent, appealed against a decision of the Supreme Court of Queensland, which dismissed his claim for commission against Anserdoro Pty Ltd, a property developer. Newman alleged that he was entitled to a commission for arranging the sale of a property, despite not having a written contract with Anserdoro. Anserdoro argued that Newman's claim was barred by the written contract between Anserdoro and another party, which expressly excluded any commission to be paid to Newman.

The primary issue before the court was whether Newman was entitled to claim commission under the circumstances, given the absence of a written agreement and the existence of a written contract between Anserdoro and another party. The court had to determine whether the oral agreement between Newman and Anserdoro was enforceable and whether it could override the written contract between Anserdoro and the other party. The court also had to consider whether there was any implied contract or agreement that would entitle Newman to a commission.

The court held that Newman's claim was not barred by the written contract between Anserdoro and the other party. The court found that there was an enforceable oral agreement between Newman and Anserdoro, which entitled Newman to a commission. The court held that the oral agreement was valid and binding, despite the absence of a written agreement. The court also found that the oral agreement was not inconsistent with the written contract between Anserdoro and the other party. The court held that the oral agreement could stand alongside the written contract and did not preclude Newman's entitlement to a commission. The court further held that there was no implied contract or agreement that would entitle Newman to a commission.

The appeal was allowed, and the matter was remitted to the Supreme Court of Queensland for the determination of the amount of commission payable to Newman. The court held that there was no error of law in the Supreme Court's decision, but the court had erred in failing to consider the enforceability of the oral agreement between Newman and Anserdoro. The court also held that the Supreme Court had not considered whether there was any implied contract or agreement that would entitle Newman to a commission. The court ordered that the matter be remitted to the Supreme Court of Queensland for the determination of the amount of commission payable to Newman, having regard to the oral agreement between Newman and Anserdoro.