Weston v Connor

Weston (the appellant) appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the appellant's entitlement to a commission on the sale of a property, which had been sold by the respondent, a real estate agent. The appellant contended that he had introduced the ultimate purchaser to the property and that this introduction was the effective cause of the sale, thereby entitling him to a commission under his agreement with the respondent.

The High Court was required to determine whether the appellant had established a sufficient causal connection between his introduction of the purchaser and the subsequent sale of the property to warrant the payment of a commission. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the appellant's actions constituted the effective or proximate cause of the sale, notwithstanding that the respondent had also been involved in negotiations and ultimately finalised the transaction.

The court applied the well-established legal principle that to be entitled to a commission, a real estate agent must demonstrate that their introduction of the purchaser was the effective cause of the sale. Gleeson CJ and Callinan J found that while the appellant had indeed introduced the purchaser to the property, the subsequent negotiations and the ultimate agreement to purchase were primarily driven by the respondent's efforts. The court concluded that the appellant's introduction, while a necessary first step, was not the proximate or effective cause of the sale, and therefore the appellant was not entitled to a commission. The appeal was dismissed.