Does Apparent Authority Wane?—A Problematic Question in English Agency Law

Peter G. Watts
{"title":"Does Apparent Authority Wane?—A Problematic Question in English Agency Law","authors":"Peter G. Watts","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3915409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When does a third party who has established that at some point a principal held out an agent as authorised to act for the principal lose the right to rely on that holding out? The case law on this topic in Commonwealth jurisdictions is surprisingly inconclusive and complex. The answer to the question, it is suggested, should be very simple. The third party should lose the right to rely on a holding out once it becomes unreasonable to rely on it. It is true that such a simple answer does not admit of mechanical application. But mechanical rules are no good if they frequently fail to come near to the merits of human interaction. An edited version of this paper was published in [2018] Journal of Business Law 663.","PeriodicalId":255520,"journal":{"name":"English & Commonwealth Law eJournal","volume":"229 7","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English & Commonwealth Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3915409","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When does a third party who has established that at some point a principal held out an agent as authorised to act for the principal lose the right to rely on that holding out? The case law on this topic in Commonwealth jurisdictions is surprisingly inconclusive and complex. The answer to the question, it is suggested, should be very simple. The third party should lose the right to rely on a holding out once it becomes unreasonable to rely on it. It is true that such a simple answer does not admit of mechanical application. But mechanical rules are no good if they frequently fail to come near to the merits of human interaction. An edited version of this paper was published in [2018] Journal of Business Law 663.
表面权威减弱了吗?——英国代理法中的一个问题
当第三方认定在某一时刻被委托人委托代理人作为被授权代理人为其行事时,该第三方何时丧失依赖该委托代理人的权利?联邦司法管辖区关于这一主题的判例法令人惊讶地缺乏结论性和复杂性。有人建议,这个问题的答案应该很简单。一旦不合理,第三方就失去了依赖债权人的权利。的确,这样一个简单的回答不能机械地应用。但是,如果机械规则经常不能接近人类互动的优点,那么它们就不是什么好规则。本文的编辑版本发表于[2018]《商业法杂志》663号。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信