Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Turun HO 08.05.1981 TU-241 AI generated

Real estate agent's commission claim dismissed when property sold by municipality without agent's action.

Case Number Turun HO 08.05.1981 TU-241
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the real estate agent's claim for a commission after the property was sold by the municipality without the agent's involvement. The owners had agreed to sell the property exclusively to the agent, but the municipality exercised its right of first refusal under housing production law. The court held that enforcing the exclusive sales clause and the resulting commission right would contradict good commercial practice and fairness.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Real Estate Intermediaries Act 21 §; Consumer Protection Act Chapter 4 Section 1: An exclusive sales clause and associated commission right are invalid if the property is sold by a municipality without the intermediary's action, as this contradicts good commercial practice.

Keywords

AI generated
exclusive sales clause municipality right of first refusal real estate intermediary commission good commercial practice consumer protection law housing production law invalid contract term

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Real Estate Intermediaries Act 21 §
Real Estate Intermediaries Act 24 § paragraph 1
Consumer Protection Act Chapter 4 Section 1
Housing Production Act 15 §
AI generated
kko-precedent_1988_48
Supreme Court dismisses agent's commission claim when underlying property sale is declared void for lack of authority.
kko-precedent_1992_182
Supreme Court allows adjustment of broker fee due to consumer protection against unfairness after contract rescission.
admin_2002_turku__346
Administrative court dismissed appeal, ruling city's acquisition decision is a municipal law matter, not planning law.
appeal_1981_eastern-finland__1919
Court dismisses appeal against enforcement order as defendant was not a proper party to the proceedings.
kko-other_2016_1752
Supreme Court rules that a planning agreement's hiking trail clause binds new owners based on the master plan.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Valtion asuntolainoittaman omakotitalon omistajat olivat antaneet kiinteistön yksinoikeudella kiinteistövälitystoimiston myytäväksi. Sopimuksen ehtojen mukaan välittäjä oli oikeutettu palkkioon siinäkin tapauksessa, että kiinteistö sopimuksenvoimassaoloaikana luovutettiin toiselle ilman välittäjän toimenpiteitä. Koska kiinteistö oli asuntotuotantolain 15 §:n mukaisesti tarjottu kunnan lunastettavaksi ja kunnan toimenpitein myyty, yksinmyyntiehtoa ja siihen perustuvaa oikeutta välityspalkkioon pidettiin hyvän kiinteistönvälitystavan vastaisena ja kohtuuttomana. Välityspalkkiota koskeva ehto jätettiin kiinteistönvälittäjäasetuksen 21 §:n ja 24 §:n 1 momentin sekä kuluttajansuojalain 4 luvun 1 §:n nojalla huomioon ottamatta ja välittäjän palkkiovaatimus hylättiin.

Läsnä: Saxén - Schrey - Selander Esittelijä: Nisula

KKO:n ratkaisu:

Päätös n:o 3885/9.10.1981: ei valituslupaa