Law of Agency Question

wigsa100

Might be clutching at straws here as I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this, but currently doing an essay question in which I'm asked to illustrate that
the priority which commercial law places on the importance of meeting the needs of those engaged in commerce, over the strict adherence to doctrine and rules of law.

Any ideas as to how I would do just that?

Thanks for any help!

NoQuarter

wigsa100 wrote: »

Might be clutching at straws here as I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this, but currently doing an essay question in which I'm asked to illustrate that
the priority which commercial law places on the importance of meeting the needs of those engaged in commerce, over the strict adherence to doctrine and rules of law.

Any ideas as to how I would do just that?

Thanks for any help!

Read up on the "business efficacy test". It is widely used today in commercial disputes. There should be plenty about it online but if you can get your hands on a contract book you will be able to put in some good references that will boe well for your essay mark.

234

wigsa100 wrote: »

Might be clutching at straws here as I'm not sure if this is the right forum for this, but currently doing an essay question in which I'm asked to illustrate that
the priority which commercial law places on the importance of meeting the needs of those engaged in commerce, over the strict adherence to doctrine and rules of law.

Any ideas as to how I would do just that?

Thanks for any help!

Well if you look at the area of ostensible authority you have many examples of where the law prioritises doctrine over practicality. In almost every case the third party will get screwed and the principal protected where it would be more commercially pragmatic to uphold the transaction. Compare the orthodoxy with First Energy. You could also look at the recent decision of the Privy Council in this regard.

wigsa100

Thanks for the help both of you. I seem to be getting through it, just about! One question though, do either of you know whether in the case of Ireland v Livingstone, this is an exception to the doctrine of privity of contract? I know that usually, the agent negotiating on behalf of the principal creates privity of contract between the principal and the third party, however, there are several third parties in this case.

Is it fair to say that by the agent bringing about a successful action against the principal despite not being privy to the contract, this is an exception to the doctrine of privity of contract?

Thanks for any help!

234

Ah, sure it's fair enough, like.