Court approves Re/Max Canada’s .8 million class action settlement

Court approves Re/Max Canada’s $7.8 million class action settlement

Re/Max Canada confirms that the court has approved the agreement $7.8 million settlement of two class action lawsuits challenging real estate commission structures.

The company confirmed in a statement to Real Estate Magazine that a decision was made this week, allowing Re/Max to move forward with addressing the allegations in the case. Sunderland And McFall cases, alleging that existing rules requiring home sellers to pay buyer agent commissions drive up costs and limit competition.

Redo/Max revealed for the first time the settlement agreement in February.

“Re/Max Canada is pleased that the court has approved our settlement in the Sunderland and McFall cases, and we thank the court for its thoughtful review and decision,” read a statement to REM. “Since beginning this process, Re/Max has been focused on supporting our network and strengthening the strength of the brand. Our community of trusted, productive professionals will continue to deliver exceptional value to buyers and sellers across the country.”

Re/Max has maintained that tThe settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing.

This development follows similar settlements in the United States, where Re/Max and other major real estate companies, as well as the National Association of Realtors (NAR), agreed to financial settlements to resolve claims of anti-competitive commission practices.

Settlement details

According to one notification published in August by Toronto law firm Kalloghlian Myers LLP, the settlement requires three things from Re/Max:

  1. Pay $7.8 million
  2. Cooperate in the ongoing prosecution of the class actions against the non-settlement defendants
  3. Implement several changes, including “ending the practice of requiring its franchisees and their affiliated brokers, salespeople and agents to affiliate with or be members of a defendant real estate board or association, or to follow the rules that allegedly give rise to the damages sought in this action.”