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
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll