Monopoly Realty and World Business Brokers were experienced real estate agents. At one point, World Business Brokers drew attention to commercial real estate for sale and contacted Monopoly Realty with this information. This was not a list that World Business Brokers had; There may have been nothing but a situation for sale by the owner. (The Tribunal`s decision remains silent on this aspect of the case.) However, the situation is different for co-brokerage claims – and cooperating agents may be the norm rather than the exception for business transactions. In addition, as many experienced commercial agents have already seen, the broker who has cooperated or expelled may not only have much less knowledge and skills in the field of commercial real estate agents, but also contribute significantly less to the success of the operation. If this happens, the more experienced broker – with some legitimacy – may feel that it is not fair to spread the commissions 50-50. However, following subsequent written communications, Monopoly Realty and World Business Brokers signed a co-brokerage agreement for the sale of the property. The brief written agreement stipulated that World Business Brokers would receive half of the commissions that Monopoly Realty earns from the sale of the property in question. In return for the agreement, World Business Brokers Monopoly Realty provided information that the property was for sale. Nothing in the agreement required World Business Brokers to make a list or answer in the affirmative to an action. After providing the information that the property was for sale, World Business Brokers complied with the terms of the agreement between the companies. The parties were then bound by their contract. Complex commercial real estate transactions may require an experienced real estate agent who takes time and effort to bring about a sale.
If a cooperating broker is involved, the rules of co-brokerage should be clear from the outset. While this may be the obvious, take the time to reduce yourself to writing down everything that is expected to be part of a co-brokerage agreement if you agree to share a commission with another agent. In the event of a dispute, a court cannot read implied terms in it. However, the court found that the contract between Monopoly Realty and World Business Brokers, although a “bad deal” for Monopoly Realty, was binding and enforceable on all parties. It also found that the co-brokerage contract was supported by appropriate consideration (the information that the property was for sale) and that it could not have been terminated by Monopoly Realty after receiving the information. . . .