header-logo header-logo

Agency

17 January 2014
Issue: 7590 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Gray v Smith and others [2013] EWHC 4136 (Comm), [2013] All ER (D) 237 (Dec)

It was settled law that, in respect of agency for an undisclosed principal, although the intention of one party communicated to the other was not usually relevant to the legal effect of a transaction, it was plain that that had to be a case where intention was relevant. If the agent intended to act for his own profit and not on the principal’s behalf, the principal could not intervene or be sued. Whether the agent so intended was a matter of evidence. The agent acquired legal title, albeit he had acted in breach of his contractual duty as agent, while the principle acquired an equitable interest, which the courts would recognise by imposing a constructive trust and, where necessary, requiring delivery up. The question of whether an equitable proprietary interest bound third parties was usually governed by the principle that a bona fide purchaser for value of a legal interest took free of the equitable proprietary interest. The doctrine of “notice” lay at

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll