Use the ILAC format with supporting cases and/or statutes, where appropriate, to answer this Section.

1.Mr Yuen and his wife engaged Ang, an associate from ERA, to sell their condominium unit in Riverside Piazza in 2007.They sold the unit at $688,000 as they took Ang's word this was the best price he could get.Unknown to the sellers at that time, the buyer was actually the wife of Mike, Ang's boss and she re-sold it almost immediately for $945,000, making a hefty profit.Mike was behind the whole scheme and he had been advertising the unit for sale even before the couple granted the option of sale which bore the logo of ERA.When the sellers found out about the scheme, they refused to pay the commission to ERA and the company sue them in the Small Claims Tribunal.The sellers then decided to claim against ERA, Ang and Mike for the difference in the two sale prices.

(Source: Yuen Chow Hin v ERA Realty Network [2009] 2 SLR(R) 786)

a.Advise Mr Yuen and his wife on the grounds for their claim and its chances of success against the defendants.

b.ERA's defence is that it is not legally liable for the acts of Ang and Mike because they acted as "independent contractors" and were not employees of the company.Is this defence valid?