header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
22 January 2016 / Sophie Belgrove , Alison Padfield
Issue: 7683 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

The worst of both worlds

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7683_belgrovepadfield

Sophie Belgrove & Alison Padfield examine commercial agents

There is a category of self-employed commercial agents for whom the law provides protection on termination of their agency agreements, loosely analogous to unfair dismissal rights for employees. These are “commercial agents”, and the protection is provided by the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 (SI 1993/3053) (the Regulations), which implement EC Directive 86/653 (the Directive). The purpose of the Directive and the Regulations is to provide protection for commercial agents, but there is an obvious tension between that purpose and freedom of contract in an otherwise commercial setting. This is explored in two recent Mercantile Court decisions concerning the agent’s rights on termination: Shearman v Hunter Boot Ltd [2014] EWHC 47 (QB), [2014] All ER (D) 144 (Jan) and Brand Studio Ltd v St John Knits, Inc [2015] EWHC 3143 (QB), [2015] All ER (D) 23 (Nov).

Agents

“Commercial agents” for the purposes of the Regulations are self-employed agents who negotiate the sale or purchase of goods on behalf of

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Taylor Rose—Jessica Draganescu & Emily Hewlett

Taylor Rose—Jessica Draganescu & Emily Hewlett

Firm strengthens growth strategy and group litigation capability with senior hires

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Is inequality undermining trust?
The legal profession’s claim to be a ‘guardian of fairness’ is under scrutiny after stark findings on gender imbalance and opaque progression. Writing in NLJ this week, Joshua Purser of No5 Barristers’ Chambers and Govindi Deerasinghe of Global 50/50 warn that leadership remains dominated by a narrow elite, with men holding 71% of top court roles
NLJ this week: Freemasons ruling backs police transparency over privacy claims
A legal challenge to police disclosure rules has failed, reinforcing a push for transparency in policing. In NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth examines a case where the Metropolitan Police required officers to declare membership of groups like the Freemasons
NLJ this week: Right to grieve marks ‘major shift’ in employment law
Bereavement leave is undergoing a quiet but profound transformation. Writing in NLJ this week, Robert Hargreaves of York St John University explains how the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a day-one right to leave for a wider range of losses, alongside new provisions for pregnancy loss and bereaved partners
NLJ this week: AI privilege battles expose risks
Courts are beginning to grapple with whether AI-generated material is legally privileged—and the answers are mixed. In this week's issue of NLJ, Stacie Bourton, Tom Whittaker & Beata Kolodziej of Burges Salmon examine US rulings showing how easily privilege can be lost
NLJ this week: Experts warned—AI use must be transparent
New guidance seeks to bring order to the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Minesh Tanna and David Bridge of Simmons & Simmons set out a framework stressing ‘transparency’, ‘explainability’ and ‘reliability’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll