header-logo header-logo

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

Agency

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll