Kelly v Cooper
An estate agent acting for several sellers of similar properties is not in breach of duty by failing to tell one seller of confidential information obtained from another, because the terms of the agency imply this.
Facts
Mr Kelly engaged Cooper, an estate agent in Bermuda, to sell his house. The agent also acted for the owner of the house next door. A buyer, Mr Brant, agreed to buy the house next door, and then made an offer for Mr Kelly's house. The agent did not tell Mr Kelly that Mr Brant had agreed to buy the neighbouring house, which would have shown that Mr Brant was likely to pay a higher price. Mr Kelly accepted the offer, and later sued the agent for breach of duty.
Legal principle
The Privy Council held that the agent was not liable. Lord Browne-Wilkinson said that the extent of an agent's fiduciary duties depends on the terms of the agency contract, and that it was an implied term of the contract with an estate agent, who is known to act for many principals selling similar properties, that he could act for other principals and was not obliged to disclose confidential information obtained from them. The agent was therefore entitled to keep the information about the neighbouring sale confidential, and was not in breach of duty, so he was entitled to his commission.
Related cases on agency
- Armagas Ltd v Mundogas SA (The Ocean Frost) [1986] AC 717
- Bolton Partners v Lambert (1889) 41 Ch D 295
- Collen v Wright (1857) 8 E & B 647
- De Bussche v Alt (1878) 8 Ch D 286
- First Energy (UK) Ltd v Hungarian International Bank Ltd [1993] 2 Lloyd's Rep 194
- Freeman & Lockyer v Buckhurst Park Properties (Mangal) Ltd [1964] 2 QB 480
- Hely-Hutchinson v Brayhead Ltd [1968] 1 QB 549
- Hippisley v Knee Brothers [1905] 1 KB 1
Studying commercial law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
