Legal Aspects of Business

This report discusses the legal aspects of business, focusing on the relationship between principals and agents. It explores agency law and its implications, including relevant cases. The report also covers the duties of agents and principals in maintaining a fiduciary relationship. Topics include the creation of agency, types of agency relationships, and the responsibilities of agents and principals. The report provides insights into the legal framework governing business relationships.

Legal aspects of Business

Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3
MAIN BODY..................................................................................................................................3
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................7
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................8
:

INTRODUCTION
Agency, in law have the statements to the clear level of relationships which have to major level
of existences when the party or person have engaged to act for him in order to towards his work,
sells the goods and proper managing the business in more appropriate. On the other hand, this is
more concerns with development of external business relation of an economic units also g with
various level of representative which effects the legal positions of a principal. In this report, there
will be critical discussions of statements which is relevant cases in the area if agency law.
MAIN BODY
The relationship in agency law is been created by the respective level of contents of the both
agents and principals as no one can be unwittingly became an agent for another. The relationship
of principals and agents can have clear creation between parties which can be expressed by their
words per implied by their conduct.
As per the key take away which is needed to be considered while having the development of
key considerations at the time of development of maintaining the healthy level of relationship in
managing the appropriate management. They are such as –
A principal has the key appointments of an agents to have the act on behalf along with their best
interest in more appropriate way (Dimitriu, 2017). For example, there is inclusions investor
which is about picking a fund managers or dome one hiring an attorney for legal work.
There should be no level of conflict of interest in between the two, if there is which is
creations principal agents’ problem.
The principal’s agent’s relationship is been expressed clearly through the written contracts
which is implied through the creation of managements.
There is management of special consideration when principals’ agent’s relationship which
is expressed clearly through fiduciary relationship between the parties involved. This means the
agent acting on behalf of the principal must carry out the assigned tasks with the principal's best
interest as a priority hiring.
The key take ways-
An agent is authorised to act on behalf of another person.
The people are having proper hiring to have proper level of performance of task that’s they
have acted the time to expertise to do for themselves.
3

An universal agents have the development of authority to an act on another behalf, but a
general agents or special agents have the limited and specific powers.
Expresses agency is relationship through level of agreements through state in their intentions to
have representing trusteeship (DeMott, 2018). There is binding o varies from the states to states.
this is typical agreements which have listing buyer’s agency by agreements. The written
agreement is the most appropriate and legally safe way to create an agency relationship.
Implied agency has the establishments of implied level of relationship where no contracts is
written or said, but they act as the agency relationships. For in case- Mr. X has the decision to
sell her homes by putting the for-sale sign in lawn. On the other miss Y pass there as a real
estate agent and ask some questions about the house.as X refuses to sale house through
brokerage. Next day miss y bought the couple who want to buy houses. buyer and miss y have
negotiated the deal with X which turns out to be clear implication for establishments of implied
agency relationship.
Agency by estoppel is been created has the principal does have the managements of agent from
going beyond rather beyond the agent’s normal duties which have the gives positive level of
impression agency has been established (Bogomolov, Streufert and Palantir Technologies Inc,
2018). As for example state that’s he oner of building and telling the agent in order to show
apartments with possible level of tenants. The agents have the ahead proper negotiations a lease
even though agents don’t have given authority. The teenagers have ass the authority and the
agent by estoppel is being created.
Agency by ratification is create by having proper level of acceptances without
authorization and without ever speaking to the seller, negotiates for deal.it has been created when
seller ratified what the agent has been doing for acceptable deal.
Agency coupled with an interest- as the agency is being couples with interest to a
respective situation in which an engages have the development of some kind of interest in
respect to property that’s is ben sold. As case as part time broker is architect by profession. He
broker/architect agrees to design some houses for a builder who’s giving the broker/architect the
listings for the sale of the finished houses. In the more level of essences, the former made any
level of agreements, so the builder doesn’t have the right to cancel the agency agreement.
4

The relationship between the agents and clients is called as fiduciary level of relationships which
have the clear meaning of faithful servant and as agents of fiduciary of the client. In addition to
the duties are such as
The duty to follow the lawful and reasonable instructions of the principal in which the should
b considered clears level of accountability and her commingle o have the developments if
business funds (Nonet, Selznick and Kagan, 2017). This is also having clear addition s to the
clients any informatises which have receiving’s that’s may be benefited the position of respective
clients in the process of efficient negotiation.
The duty of care along with skill have the developments of agents must have clear in
using the all their respective skills to the best level of ability on the behold of clients. In
dedication to that’s the agents should have the major duty in regard maintaining proper level of
confidentiality especially the one which is considered to have more level of damages to the client
as the in the process of negotiation.
The common law has requirements of any agents with the due level of skills and the
care which is performing his duties in more appropriate level. As per the level of profession as
per trade and calling who have the performance of duties with degrees if care and skill of the
reasonable average members of the relevant position skill expected of a reasonable, average
member of the relevant profession, trade or calling meets the requisite standard.
The duty to avoid conflict of interest is the key to have the development of the fiduciary level
of relationships in order to have the development of effectiveness in relationships. The fiduciary
is considered to have the supposing the right things in level of all respective situation (Farooq, M
and et.al.2017). As in the case when a trustee is having the will to buy assets form the he is
managing, that is an inherent conflict of interest. No one has the ability to be truly unbiased in
that situation. As a result, any dealing between the Trust and its Trustee is considered an
automatic breach of Trust under California law.
The duty to account is all of the principal in which there should be considered clears level of
accountability and her commingle o have the developments of business funds. This is
consideration to be the general allow which is not delegating the duty in the whole in parts to
have the acceptancy which is considered to be parts of principals.
5

The duty not to delegate authority is in consideration of development of worthiness
which is considered in account his trustworthiness along with skill an experience (Nelken, D. ed.,
2017). Hence, the agents have the more level of implied authority which have the proper level of
deployments if the sub agents in order to have the carry out the performance different duties n
more appropriate manner.
In the situation the agents not considered to have delegation of authority in more way
of obeying the a lawful and level of instructions at the reasonable rates of the principal. There is
more clear level of introspection which are considered to be clear which is more in level of
branch of duty which is liable in order to have the apprise compensation s of any loss which is
more principals to have the suffering the consequence.
However, he principals’ instructions which are the considered to be an ambiguous as to
have the agents which is considered not to be certain their meaning. In addition, there should be
clarify proper level of instructions with principals to have for level of acting (Hansmann, H. and
Kraakman, 2017).
The next is duty to obey the lawful and reasonable instructions of the principal. The
agents are the normally level of decorations’ and must have the following the level of instruction
which is abusable roe have the compensates for any loss which is not considered to be level of
principal.
Cases that are needed to be discussed-
Case
Creations of agency by operation of law as in the case pf the Lapraik v burrows(1859)
English Reports 50, when the ship arrived in the harbour, the captain found that the ship was
unseaworthy. This could not on to sea. So, thy were decided to have save further loss the sold
the ship. The owners were held liable of the acts of the acts who was in regarded as the agents of
necessity.
Case
In the case of Pianta v Macrow and Sons Pty Ltd (1925) 27 WALR 99, the trader who have
sold as if of diamond king on credit cannot claim its cost form the husband it its wife doesn’t not
have for pay for it.
Case
6

In the case of Rama Corporation v Proved Tin and General Investments Ltd [1952] 2 QB
147, the English court of appeals which have emphasized three main requirements for the agency
by estoppel which is in presentation by principals
A reliance’s by a third party on that representation.
An alteration of the third party which is realisations form the such level of presentation.
In Lloyds Bank Ltd v Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China (1929) 1 KB 4, is the case in
which in the senior employee of Lloyds banks have few the cheques frequently and paid them
into a personal accounts h use to mainstem in chartered banks. When the banks comes to know,
they have claimed the value of cheques form the chartered banks. on the other hand, latter banks
have clearly argued that’s Lawson was an accredited agent of Lloyd’s Bank so they were liable
as the principal for the agent’s acts – even if they were unauthorized. No estopel applied as the
latter banks could not proves hats the loss was caused by the nay repressive of loyal banks. Do
the former banks was liable for the fraudulent act of Lawson.
Case
In Turpin v Billton (1843) 5 Man & G 455, the agent is considered to be fails in order to have the
insurance f principal goods which had been undertaken to have safeguards. the agent was held
liable of the loss w which has been caused.
Case
In Bertram Armstrong & Co v Godfrey (1830) 12 English Rep 364. A broker has instructed to
his principals in order to tell someone’s when the shares when the market proceed rescales a
certain figure. On the other hand, the broker failed to do so the broker has been taken courts as
was liable to the principals, for the loss which is bee suffered due to care lessness.
Case
In John McCann & Co v Pow (1975) 1 All ER 129, the principals brim appointed a firm a reals
estate agents has flats. With the principals, the agents have given detail to sub agents is found a
buyer. The agent has been asked up with commissioner regarding the flat. The court have the
held that they have delegates the sub agents without the principle permission, so the principals is
on it liable to pays any commission to the agents as the fast has been sold on pres. requested.
CONCLUSION
From the above report, it can be concluded that relationship of principals and agents can
have clear creation between parties which can be expressed by their words per implied by their
7

conduct. In addition to that’s it means the agent acting on behalf of the principal must carry out
the assigned tasks with the principal's best interest as a priority hiring. There is having clear
addition to the clients any informatises which have receiving’s that’s may be benefited the
position of respective clients in the process of efficient negotiation. The sub agents in order to
have the carry out the performance different duties more appropriate manner.
8

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Online
Hansmann, H. and Kraakman, R., 2017. The end of history for corporate law. In Corporate
governance (pp. 49-78). Gower.
Nelken, D. ed., 2017. Comparing legal cultures. Routledge.
Farooq, M., Sapuram, R., Modh, M. and Erickson, R., International Business Machines Corp,
2018. Developing, implementing, transforming and governing a business model of an enterprise.
U.S. Patent 10,095,990.
Nonet, P., Selznick, P. and Kagan, R.A., 2017. Law and society in transition: Toward responsive
law. Routledge.
Bogomolov, A., Streufert, J. and Knight, B., Palantir Technologies Inc, 2018. Overview user
interface of emergency call data of a law enforcement agency. U.S. Patent 10,042,524.
DeMott, D., 2018. Fiduciary Principles in Agency Law. Forthcoming in Evan J. Criddle, Paul B.
Miller and Robert H. Sitkoff, Eds., the Oxford Handbook of Fiduciary Law (New York: Oxford
University Press 2018).
Dimitriu, C., 2017. Agency law and odious debts. Ethics & Global Politics, 10(1), pp.77-97.
Mansell, S. an et.al., 2019. Rethinking Corporate Agency in Business, Philosophy, and Law.
9

10

11