"AGENCY BY ESTOPPEL." The liability of a principal for all contracts entered i on his behalf by an agent acting within his apparen ostensible authority is. AGENCY BY ESTOPPEL." The issue between Professor Cook and the Estoppel- sinners (of whom, for the moment, I appear to be the mos notorious) is stated as. Agency by estoppel is still considered a legally binding agency relationship. This means that an individual or company cannot unofficially give someone the.


Author: Gavin Schoen
Country: Norway
Language: English
Genre: Education
Published: 4 November 2014
Pages: 212
PDF File Size: 26.71 Mb
ePub File Size: 39.31 Mb
ISBN: 456-8-40578-128-9
Downloads: 35100
Price: Free
Uploader: Gavin Schoen

Download Now

Agency by estoppel

This means that an individual or company cannot unofficially give someone the appearance of working on their behalf but then distance agency by estoppel from the consequences of that ostensible agent's actions.

International Legal English International Legal English Second edition is the definitive course for students who need to work in the international legal community. International Legal English Second edition teaches agency by estoppel how to use English in a commercial law environment and is suitable for classroom use or self-study.

This second edition has fully-updated content - including twice the number of authentic case studies compared to the first edition - and contains a new unit on Transnational Commercial Law.

An updated pull-out glossary is included in the Student's Book. International Legal English 2nd Agency by estoppel International Legal English Second edition is the definitive course for students who need to work in the international legal community.

International Legal English Teacher's Book is an essential companion for any teacher wishing to use International Legal English Second edition in the classroom. As stated, the common law generally does not impose liability for nonfeasance, only for malfeasance, as in the lack of a duty to rescue.

It may be argued that law does not impose any liability to help others, its position for agency by estoppel can be justified by considering the difficulty in fixing limits for the party contracting with the agent and also that the purported principal is in the best position to prevent the harm, and it is usually not agency by estoppel to ascertain what it was reasonable for him to do[21].

Estoppel is a concept from the common law of tort and evidence, not contract. An other way of creating apparent authority can come from the principal telling the agent to misinform the agency by estoppel party of the agent's authority[22].


Further, an agent cannot bind a principal by tricking the third party into believing that the agent agency by estoppel authority[23]. These features make it even clearer that the driving idea is the least-cost-avoider principle, rather than contract theories. Estoppel has two special features in contrast to other sources of liability.

First, the third party's recovery is limited to the losses caused by the principal's failure to prevent the mistake, not expectation damages. Strictly speaking, the principal's failure does not make an invalid agreement into a contract; it just makes the principal liable for damages.

If agency by estoppel is no reliance by the third party, no recovery is possible. Second, estoppel is a one-way street. The third party can obtain damages from the principal, but the principal cannot enforce the agreement against the third party unless it is made valid by ratification.

Agency by Estoppel financial definition of Agency by Estoppel

Under Indian law, unless the principal and agent is proved to exist between the parties, Sec. Whereas under English law, a pre existing principal-agent relationship is not required for application of the principle of agency by estoppel. Following cases will further elaborate agency by estoppel the concept of agency by estoppel.


It was argued that LIC was liable on the basis of doctrine of apparent authority of the agent to collect premium from the policy holders. Though collection of premium amount is a general practice followed by LIC agents, it was found that Agency by estoppel had not by any of its conduct induced the policy holders agency by estoppel believing that agents were authorised to collect premium.

Also, there was no material on the record to support the argument of the plaintiff. The Ram Chandran Case: A clerk of a society also functioned as a cashier. Later he was barred by the society to receive payments from members of the society.

The clerk was held out as the agent of the society agency by estoppel act on its behalf in matters concerning receipt of money from the members. Thus the clerk was held to have am ostensible apparent authority and Sec.

Other Posts: