Duty of estate agent — Advice regarding marketing and valuation of timber — Whether plaintiffs would have incurred expense consequent to advice — Whether breach of duty in contract or in negligence — Sale to government department — Whether nominal damages — Counterclaim for sale commission — Claim allowed but nominal damages awarded
In or about March 1984 the plaintiffs appointed the defendant estate agents to advise upon and effect the sale of two estates in County Donegal, Lough Eske Castle and Ardnamona. The appointment was as joint agents with Hamilton & Hamilton. Following the advice of the defendants, the estates were sold to the Irish Department of Forestry and Fisheries for IR£325,000 in May 1985. The plaintiffs claimed that the recommendations of the defendants as to the marketing of the property and the advice to sell to the department was negligent and that an overall price of IR£500,000 should have been achieved. The defendants counterclaimed for the commission on the sale.
Held The claim was allowed and nominal damages of £1 awarded; the counterclaim was allowed.
The defendants had been negligent in not advising on an expert valuation of the standing timber on the estates. But they were not otherwise negligent with regard to the conduct of the sale; the evidence was that there was only one interested purchaser, namely the department. However, the plaintiffs would not have been prepared to pay for a valuation at the time. Accordingly, the plaintiffs had suffered no loss and damages of £1 were ordered.
Singer & Friedlander v John D Wood & Co (1977) 243 EG 212 applied.
Harold Burnett QC and William Norris (instructed by Greenwoods, of Peterborough) appeared for the plaintiffs; and Bernard Livesey (instructed by Barlow Lyde & Gilbert) appeared for the defendants.
