The Duties Owed by Agents to their Principals May or May not be Essay

The Duties Owed by Agents to their Principals may or May not be Dictated by the Express Terms of the Contracts Between them - Essay Example(2011). Q & A Commercial uprightness 2011-2012. Oxon Taylor & Francis sixth ed. De Busccche v Alt (1878) 8 ChD 286 in Reddy, J., & Johnson, H. (2011). Q & A Commercial virtue 2011-2012. Oxon Taylor & Francis 6th ed. Headley Byrne & Co ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd (1964) AC 465 in Reddy, J., & Johnson, H. (2011). Q & A Commercial Law 2011-2012. Oxon Taylor & Francis 6th ed. Robinson v Mollett (1875) LR 7 HL 802 in Reddy, J., & Johnson, H. (2011). Q & A Commercial Law 2011-2012. Oxon Taylor & Francis 6th ed. Solley v wood (1852) in Reddy, J., & Johnson, H. (2011). Q & A Commercial Law 2011-2012. Oxon Taylor & Francis 6th ed. Turnbull v Garden (1869) 20 LT 218 145 in Reddy, J., & Johnson, H. (2011). Q & A Commercial Law 2011-2012. Oxon Taylor & Francis 6th ed. Turpin v Bilton (1843) 5 Man & G 455 in The Law of Agency, The Law of International Trad e and Carriage of Goods. Accessed 2 Nov 2011 Watteau v Fenwick 1893 1 QB 346 in University of London step to the foredoor(a) Programme Accessed 2 Nov 2011 Weigall& Co v Runciman & Co (1916) 85 LJKB 1187 in Munday Roderick and Munday R.J.C. LJKB 1187 Agency Law and Principles (2009) Oxford, Oxford University squelch The duties owed by movers to their oral sexs may or may not be dictated by the express monetary value of the contracts between them Agency is an exception to the doctrine of privity in a contract in that a principal is bound by all acts of his constituent by virtue of an arranging between him and the operator. Both rectitude and specific terms of contract between them govern the duties owed by agents to their principals. Although a contract of agency is theater to the same rules as in any other contracts, there are certain terms implied such as fiduciary relationship between the principal and the agent which gives rise duties owed to the principal by the age nt and rights he can exercise against the principal. In addition, a type known as commercial agent also is subject the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 pursuant to European Union Law dealing with termination of agreement in respect of self-employed agents who arrange contracts for the sale or purchase of goods. As per these regulations, a job is cast on the agents to act dutifully and with good faith which term cannot be contracted out by a separate contract between them. Even in the case of gratuitous acts of an agent where there can be no contractual obligations, the agent has fiduciary duties which cannot be avoided merely because of privation of consideration. He will also be apt under torts. In Watteau v Fenwick (1893), hotel owner was held liable for the price of cigar bought by the manger who had been instructed not to buy other than mineral water and beer. This decision is static controversial since the agent acted against the instructions though th e supplier assumed that the manager was the owner (Reddy & Johnson, 2011) (Sealy, Hooley, & Hooley, 2008). An agents duties regardless of the contractual terms between him and the principal are as follows. Duty to obey solely lawful instructions of the principal must be obeyed by his agent. He should not also glide by his authority. This is applicable to both paid and gratuitous agent categories. However, if the instructions are not