Agency - 1997

The case shown here are derived from the lawindexpro case law database. lawindexpro is a low cost case law database, with over 130,000 case listings, and over 95,000 links to full text judgments. The free service below shows the core information on the case, but is restricted in several ways. A small proportion of cases do allow access to the full lawindexpro information. These cases are selected at random, and may be different on your next visit. The active links through to lawindexpro are extremely powerful allowing full access to all linked cases.  

This page lists 8 cases, and was prepared on 26 February 2010.

Sovereign Finance v Silver Crest [1997] CCLR 76
1997	Agency	Casemap 1 Citers

Page -v- Combined Shipping and Trading Co Ltd [1997] 3 All ER 656; [1996] EWCA Civ 1312
1997 CA Staughton LJ	Agency, European	1 Citers
	Mr Page was taken on to trade in commodities for the defendant for a minimum period of four years. Six months later the defendant's parent company decided to cease trading activities, and he began proceedings claiming compensation under regulation 17 and applied for an injunction to prevent the defendant from moving its assets abroad. The judge dismissed the application on the grounds that, since the defendant could have operated the agreement for the remainder of its term in a way that would not have enabled him to make any money, he did not have an arguable case that he was entitled to recover a significant sum by way of damages. Held: The claimant's appeal succeeded. It was arguable that Mr Page was entitled to recover compensation under regulation 17(7) calculated by reference to the amount of commission he would have earned if the contract had been performed in accordance with the parties' original intention. Staughton LJ: "commercial agents are a down-trodden race and need and should be afforded protection against their principals". The preamble to the Directive: "points fairly strongly to an intention to depart from the domestic legal provisions of the various countries in the Community, or at any rate some of them, and achieve a regime which is new to some and will be the same for all." It was arguable that the Directive and the Regulations provided a remedy that was not available at common law.
	Council Directive 86/653/EEC of 18 December 1986 on the coordination of the laws of the Member States relating to self-employed commercial agents 17 - Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993
	Link[s] omitted

Stewart Chartering Ltd -v- Owners of the ship 'the Peppy'; Stewart Offshore Services (Jersey) Ltd -v- Silan Maritime Co & Another [1997] 2 Lloyd's Rep 722
15 Apr 1997 AdCt David Steel QC	Transport, Agency	Casemap 1 Cites
	ComC Admiralty action in rem - dishonest withholding of freight paid - meaning of dishonesty - objective and subjective considerations - reimbursement of commission - Admiralty action in rem - entitlement to commission - collateral secret profit - secret profit - distinction. David Steel QC said of the Hippisley case: "this decision of the Court of Appeal admirably demonstrates the difference between a collateral secret profit which preserves the right to commission and a secret profit (albeit honest) directly impacting on the moneys payable to the principal which may destroy the entitlement."

Laceys Footwear (Wholesale) Ltd -v- Bowler International Freight Ltd and Another [1997] 2 LL Rep 369; [1997] EWCA Civ 1454
18 Apr 1997 CA Beldam LJ, Brooke LJ	Negligence, Contract, Agency	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	The defendant's driver had taken a consignment of shoes to Spain, where they were stolen. The plaintiff alleged his gross negligence amounted to 'wilful misconduct' so as to disapply an exemption clause. Held: Whether a bailee's acts constituted wilful misconduct is dependent upon the standard ordinarily expected from someone in that position. Here the judge was entitled to find wilful misconduct on the driver's part. The broker had been liable to insure the goods and the liability was not limited by the convention. Beldam LJ said: "Further a person could be said to act with reckless carelessness towards goods in his care if, aware of the risk that they may be lost or damaged, he nevertheless deliberately goes ahead and takes the risk, when it is unreasonable in all the circumstances for him to do so." Brooke LJ discussed the burden of proof in such a case, saying that the trial judge: "should also have directed himself that since a charge of wilful misconduct was a serious charge to make, the evidence ought to have satisfied the degree of probability appropriate to the seriousness of the charge before it was appropriate to find it proved."
	Link[s] omitted

Rudra -v- National & Provincial Building Society; Stickley and Kent (Risk Management Unit) Ltd [1997] EWCA Civ 2310
22 Aug 1997 CA	Contract, Agency, Land	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	Before the auction, the estate agents had signed a contract to sell the house to the claimant. The Society, as mortgagees, said that the agents did not have authority to bind it, and that the contract did not sufficiently identify the property so as to constitute a memorandum of the sale under the 1989 Act, and refused to complete. He sought damages from the agent. The claimant sought to bring in other evidence to join the memorandum with the special conditions of sale. Held: The proposed amendment to the pleadings raised an arguable point of law. Leave to appeal was given.
	Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act l989 2
	Link[s] omitted

The National Insurance and Guarantee Corporation Plc -v- Imperio Reinsurance Company (UK) & Another Unreported, 30 September 1997
30 Sep 1997 ComC Colman J	Agency, Insurance
	ComC Reinsurance broker, whether in breach of duty to effect cover, whether waiver, estoppel or ratification a good defence; relationship between ratification and waiver; nature of principal's representation as to satisfaction with cover; availability of estoppel where Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act applicable, extent of discount for contributory negligence of a principal reassured

Michael Harwood T/a RSBS Group -v- P J Smith and A K Smith and Bedwell Watts and Company (a Firm) [1997] EWCA Civ 2725; [1998] 1 EGLR 5
14 Nov 1997 CA Lord Justice Hobhouse, Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Mummery	Agency, Consumer	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	An estate agent with sole selling rights was not entitled to claim commission on a sale where he had contributed no act to the sale, even though his terms were specific enough to deal with the particular circumstances which had arisen here. Such a clause should be interpreted tightly against those seeking to place reliance upon it. On a sensible reading of the whole statement, the liability to pay remuneration in a case such as this must, therefore, be limited to the purchaser who was introduced to the client by that estate agent during the period. If the purchaser is introduced to the client in any other way, the estate agent can only claim remuneration if he has conducted negotiations with the purchaser about the property during that period. Hobhouse LJ: "The purpose of section 18 and of the regulations is to attempt to ensure that the person instructing the estate agent shall know precisely what his liabilities to the estate agent are. Part of the mischief to which the Act and regulations were directed was the use by estate agents of expressions such as 'Sole Agency' or 'Sole Selling Rights', which had no clearly defined meaning and the implications of which would not be fully understood by the client."
	Estate Agency Act 1979 18 - Estate Agents (Provision of Information) Regulations 1991 (SI 1191 No 859) 5(1)
	Link[s] omitted

Scotlife Home Loans (No 2) Limited -v- (L) Stuart Samuel Melinek and Gillian Naomi Melinek [1997] EWCA Civ 3012
16 Dec 1997 CA The Vice-Chancellor (Sir Richard Scott) Lord Justice Otton Lord Justice Aldous	Agency, Legal Professions	Casemap 1 Cites 1 Citers
	The claimant loaned money to the defendants. Mr M was a solicitor who, with his partner, perpetrated a fraud. Mrs M appealed an order for possession saying the claimant was fixed with notice of the fraud by the solicitors acting as its agent. Held: The loan was completed before the documents were signed, and became mixed with other clients' money, and was stolen by the solicitors before it was received by the borrowers. At that time they were acting as agent for the claimant. The charge must be set aside.
	Link[s] omitted