» Sin categoría

Co-Broker Agreement New York

Many may think that the court`s decision is too rigid, applies a strict constructivist approach in the interpretation of the contract and ignores the reality of co-brokerage agreements – namely that there is an implication, that each party would draw its own weight. By refusing this involvement, the court left the parties the agreement they had reached, warnings and everything. 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. In the absence of an already existing agreement, co-broking becomes quite stained and depends on the specific agreement, the listing agent and the neighborhood. 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. The Court of Justice found that World Business Brokers had fulfilled its obligation under the contractual conditions and that the contract was therefore enforceable. While it doesn`t seem at first glance, co-broker can also be beneficial for real estate agents..