Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

Menu

CONTRACT LAW – BROKER AND AGENT’S COMMISSION – COMMSSION OR BROKERAGE AGREEMENT

Brokerage contract or commonly known as commission agreement allows referral, agent or broker to earn a commission based on sales amount received by the principal.

How does commission agreement work?

  • A commission agreement is a conditional contract. The broker or agent is entitled to his commission or brokerage fee when the event, upon which his entitlement arises, has occurred. For examples when the sales are completed between the principal and the third party or when the principal received payments from third party.
  • Remuneration of the broker or agent typically takes the form of a commission, being a percentage of the value of the transaction the agent is to bring about for the principal.
  • When the event occurred, the principal is bound by the contract to pay the agreed sum stated in the commission or brokerage agreement.

How is the agreed sum calculated?

  • Agreed sum is usually calculated based on a formula provided in the agreement.
  • A multiplier or multiplicant basis is commonly stated in the agreement. For example, 10% of the principal total sales to the third party or 10% of the payment received by the principal from the total sales to the third party.

What if the principal refused to provide evidence, details or documents pertaining to the sales or payment received?

  • The broker or agent may take out a discovery application against the principal or third party.
  • Alternatively, if there is risk documents or evidence may be destroyed to defeat the broker’s or agent’s claim for commission, an Anton Pillar Order can be sought from the court against the principal or third party.
  • Is the broker or agent required to prove losses arising from principal’s breach or refusal to pay commission earned?
  • No. A commission agreement entails claim for payment of a debt and NOT claim for damages for breach of contract.
  • A commission agreement provides for definite sum of money fixed by the agreement in return for performance of a specified obligation. This is also known in law as the “occurrence of some specified event or condition”.
  • The rule on damages do not apply to claim for a debt. There is no need for the broker or agent to prove actual loss suffered as a result of the principal’s breach. The principle of law on remoteness of damage or mitigation of loss does not apply to contract of commission.
  • (Case in Point: Lim Beng Kuan v Helms Geomarine Sdn Bhd [2023] 9 MLJ 155 and Ng Chin Tai (trading in the name and style of Lean Seh Fishery) & Anor v Ananda Kumar a/l Krishnan [2020] 1 MLJ 16)
Back to Latest Legal Updates

Recent Post

STRATA MANAGEMENT – MANAGEMENT FEE SHOWDOWN – RESIDENTIAL VS. COMMERCIAL – WHO’S PAYING FOR THE EXTRAS?

In a landmark decision in Aikbee Timbers Sdn Bhd & Anor v Yii Sing Chiu & Anor and another appeal [2024] 1 MLJ 94 , the Court of Appeal clarified the rules on maintenance charges and sinking fund contributions in mixed strata developments. Developers and management corporations can impose different rates based on the distinct purposes of residential and commercial parcels. The judgment emphasizes fairness, ensuring residential owners bear the costs of exclusive facilities like pools and gyms, while commercial owners aren’t subsidizing amenities they don’t use. This ruling highlights the importance of transparency in budgeting and equitable cost-sharing in mixed-use properties.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

ILLEGALITY OF UNREGISTERED ESTATE AGENTS’ CLAIM – FINDER’S FEES AND ILLEGALITY: COURT DRAWS THE LINE ON UNREGISTERED ESTATE AGENTS

In a pivotal ruling, the Court of Appeal clarified that finder’s fee agreements are not automatically void under the Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers Act 1981. The Court emphasized that illegality must be specifically pleaded and supported by evidence, and isolated transactions do not trigger the Act’s prohibition. This decision highlights the importance of precise pleadings and a clear understanding of the law’s scope.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

COMPANIES ACT – OPPRESSION – DRAWING THE LINE: FEDERAL COURT DEFINES OPPRESSION VS. CORPORATE HARMS

In a decisive ruling, the Federal Court clarified the boundaries between personal shareholder oppression and corporate harm, overturning the Court of Appeal’s findings. The Court held that claims tied to the wrongful transfer of trademarks belonged to the company, not the individual shareholder, reaffirming that corporate harm must be addressed through a derivative action rather than an oppression claim.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

COMPANIES LAW – WHEN DIRECTORS BETRAY: COURT CONDEMNS BREACH OF TRUST AND CORPORATE MISCONDUCT

In a stark reminder of the consequences of corporate betrayal, the court found that the directors had systematically dismantled their own company to benefit a competing entity they controlled. By breaching their fiduciary duties, conspiring to harm the business, and unjustly enriching themselves, the defendants were held accountable through significant compensatory and exemplary damages, reaffirming the critical importance of trust and integrity in corporate governance.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

JURISDICTION – CHOOSING THE RIGHT COURT: THE SEA JUSTICE CASE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE MARITIME DISPUTES SHOULD BE HEARD

In The Sea Justice cases [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 383 and [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 429, the Singapore courts tackled a key question: which country should handle a maritime dispute when incidents span international waters? After examining the location of the collision, existing limitation funds in China, and witness availability, the courts concluded that China was the more appropriate forum. This ruling highlights that courts will often defer to the jurisdiction with the closest ties to the incident, ensuring efficient and fair handling of cross-border maritime disputes. This approach is also relevant in Malaysia, where similar principles apply.

Read More »
17 11 月 ,2024 尚無留言
zh_TWZH
en_USEN ms_MYMY zh_TWZH
× 联系我们