LL.B Notes

TERMINATION BY OPERATION OF LAW

 CONTENTS

1.0      Introduction

2.0      Objectives

  • Main Content
  • By Performance
  • By Effluxtion of time
  • By Frustration
  • By Death of Principal or Agent
  • By Insanity of Principal or Agent
  • By Bankruptcy of Principal or Agent

4.0      Conclusion

5.0      Summary

6.0      Tutor-Marked Assignment

7.0      References/Further Readings

INTRODUCTION

Termination of Agency by operation of law occurs where any of the points to be discussed under the main content of this unit occurs. When such is the case the agency relationship automatically comes to an end. This is the focus of this unit.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this unit is to expose the learners to the situation that arises  where, in exceptional cases, the parties to an agency relationship will be relieved of  their obligations under the agency agreement. Usually, this situation puts an end to their relationship except where prior claims are yet to be made.

MAIN CONTENT

The main content of this unit is six in number each with its peculiarities in relation to termination of agency by operation of law.

By Performance

In cases where an agent is given an authority to accomplish or achieve a specific result reason demands that the authority terminates upon the object of the power being accomplished.

Generally, there are some or difficulties that can be identified with regard to the practical operation of this method of agency determination.

Firstly, there may be  some  initial  difficulty of ascertaining  the point  in time  when an  agent’s  authority  ceased   or   has   been   executed.   An example is the authority of an estate agent.

Secondly, it may be possible for  the  express  or  implied  authority of  an agent  to have  ceased  while  his  apparent  or  ostensible  authority continues.  In  this   situation, an agent may validly assert his apparent or ostensible authority when his express or implied authority has been fully executed. In such circumstances, the  agency under which he was exercising express or implied authority might have terminated. In its place, an agency of estoppel might have been created or subsisting. Such apparent or ostensible authority or agency by  estoppel  would  cease  or terminate, as the case  may be,  whether  by performance,  revocation  or renunciation in the ordinary way.

SELF ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 1

Termination of agency by performance becomes effective when the purpose of the agency has been achieved. Do you agree?

By Effluxtion of Time

It is also generally expected that the authority of an agent  which  was conferred on  him for a specific period of time terminates or ceases automatically upon  the  expiration of that period of time. The agency relationship terminates at the expiration of such period of time irrespective of whether the task or object contemplated by its creation or formation has been accomplished or not.

Where no time is specified or agreed upon by the parties in their agency arrangement,  a reasonable time is implied by the parties and  the authority terminates at the expiration of such reasonable time or period.

What constitutes a reasonable time or period depends upon the facts and the surrounding circumstances of the particular case.

The period of time may also be fixed or agreed to by the parties to the agency arrangement or implied  into  their  relationship  by  custom  or  usage  of  the particular trade, business or profession to which the agent belongs or profession to which the agent belongs or in which he or she operates.  It  can  also  be presumed  from the nature and circumstances of the agency itself or the authority  given  or granted to the agent.

SELF ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 2

Explain the term “effluxion of time”.

 By Frustration

Where an agency agreement exists between the principal and the agent, it may be terminated by the operation of the doctrine of frustration. This doctrine operates in situations when two people enter into a contract of agency which is dependent for the possibility of its performance on the continued existence or availability of a specific thing or matter. When the subject matter comes to  an  end  by  reason  of circumstances beyond the control of the parties,  that  contract  of agency  is  regarded  as prima facie dissolved.

An agency relationship will automatically terminate if its object or subject matter or the authority of the agent;

  1. becomes unlawful or illegal
  2. ceases to    exist    by   reason    of   government    expropriation    or compulsory acquisition or requisition
  3. the principal or agent becomes an alien enemy
  4. impossible to be executed o r to be executed strictly in accordance with the arrangement between the principal and the agent

SELF ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 3

The operation of the doctrine of frustration in relation to agency relationship  is  absolute. Do you agree?

By Death of Principal or Agent

Death is inevitable to every living being ordinarily. Save in cases of irrevocable authority, the death of a principal or agent terminates the agency relationship unless there is an express or implied stipulation to the contrary in their  arrangement.  In Phillips v. Jones (1888)4 T.L.R.

401, It was held that the authority of a broker, express or implied, terminated on the death of the principal.

The effect of the death  of the  principal  is  that  it deprives  the agent  of that  person  for whom or on behalf of whom  he  should  act  while  the  death  of  the  agent  deprives the principal of the person through whom he should act.

Where the principal or agent is  a  limited  liability  company,  an  agency relationship  to which they are parties terminates upon the dissolution of the company. In Nzom & Anor v. Jinadu (1987)1 N.W.L.R. 533, the Supreme Court held that a dead person ceases to have legal personality from the date of his death and as such can neither sue nor be sued either personally or in representative capacity.

In essence, termination of agency relationship by death of the principal or agent is automatic. It does not depend on the  principal  or  agent  and  indeed  on  any  other party involved, acquiring knowledge or receiving notices of such  death  of  the  deceased party.

Where the death takes the form of a dissolution of a limited liability company, the principal or agent’s knowledge of the fact is necessary to effect the termination. Any transaction by the agent after the termination by the death of the principal is not binding on the latter, his personal representation or his estate.

SELF ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 4

Termination of agency agreement by the death of either the principal or agent is absolute. Discuss.

By Insanity of Principal or Agent

One of the basic ingredients of a valid contract is that the parties to such an agreement must be of sound mind. In an agency situation, this rule is also applicable and where the insanity or mental incapacity of the principal  or  the  agent  occurs,  the  relationship is terminated except in cases of irrevocable authority.

In Drew v. Nunn (1879)4 A.B. 661, the defendant  had  given  his  wife authority to deal with the plaintiff, who was a trades man, and had held her out  as  his  agent  and as entitled to pledge his credit. The defendant became insane shortly afterwards and while his insanity lasted, his wife ordered goods from the plaintiff, who accordingly supplied them. At the time  of  supplying  the  goods,  the  plaintiff  was  not  aware that the defendant had become insane. The defendant afterwards recovered and then refused to pay for the goods supplied to his wife by the plaintiff. It was held that the defendant was liable for the price of  the goods supplied to his wife during the period  of his insanity.

This  decision  would  have  been  otherwise  but  for  the  fact  that  there appears   to be in existence the wife’s  agency  of  necessity  which apparently  was  not  determined by the supervising insanity of the husband.

The incidence of knowledge or notice of insanity or mental incapacity of a party appears to be apparent in various judicial decisions. In Drew V Nunn (Supra) Brett,

  1. J. opined as follows:

“…It seems to  me that the person dealing  with  the agent without  knowledge  of  the principal’s  insanity has a  right to  enter  into  a  contract  with   him, and the principal, though a lunatic is bound so that he cannot repudiate the contract assumed to be made upon himself.”

An authority may be given to an agent which has been determined without his knowledge by insanity of the principal. If the  agent was appointed and authorised by the principal, and subsequently, the agent in the belief that he was acting in pursuance thereof made a contract or transacted some business with another  representing  that  in so doing, he was acting on behalf of the principal; the agent is liable as having  impliedly warranted the existence of the authority which he  assumed  to  exercise  to that other person, in respect of damages occasioned to him by reason of the non- existence of that authority. In Younge v. Tonybee (1910)1 K.B. 215 it was held that a solicitor was liable for breach of warranty of authority when without knowledge he continued with the litigation for a client, who had in the meantime become insane.

SELF ASSESSMENT EXERCISE 5

Knowledge of insanity is an essential ingredient  to  determine  the existence or otherwise of agency. Discuss.

By Bankruptcy of Principal or Agent

The agency relationship of principal and agent  ordinarily  terminates  at  the  bankruptcy of either the principal or agent. Where the principal becomes bankrupt his estate by law falls to be administered by his trustee in bankruptcy.

The effect of this is that the authority of an agent appointed by him automatically terminates for a different principal is created in the trustee in bankruptcy. The new principal may however re-appoint the agent but until he does so the authority of the agent in respect of the original principal is assumed to have lapse.

Where the new  principal  re-appoints  the  agent,  a  new  agency relationship is  thereby constituted in which the parties are the trustees in bankruptcy and the original agent.

CONCLUSION

Generally, termination of agency by operation of law depends on the various circumstances of each or any given agency relationship. In the absence of notable exceptions, the happening of any of the above noted situations automatically puts  an end to the agency relationship between the principal  and  the  agent.  This  is  one  of the basic facts the learners must bear and always advert his mind to while treating this issue.

SUMMARY

Learners are expected to be able to  differentiate  the various  differences inherent  in the foregoing factors and situations that put an abrupt end to a subsisting agency relationship.

TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT

Contract of agency is determined by operation of law. Discuss.

REFERENCES/FURTHER READINGS

Kingsley Igweike (1993). “Nigeria Commercial Law: Agency.” Jos, Nigeria: FAB Educational Books.

Markesinis and Munday (1986). “An Outline of Agency.” 2nd Edition.

Pollock and Maitland. “The History of English Law,” Vol. 11. 

Sir William Holdsworth. “A History of English Law,” Vol. IV. 

Walker, D.W. (1980). “The Oxford Companion to Law.” London: Butterworths.

American Restatements, Second, Agency, Article.

Friedman,      G.H.L.     (1984).      Law     of      Agency,     7th         Edition. London: Butterworths.

Contact Info

Office Address: No. 14, Eyo Etta Street, Calabar Municipality, Cross River State.

Email: info@cjokoyelawview.com cjokoyelawview@gmail.com

Phone: +234 806 981 8927

Phone: +234 808 084 0331

Image

© 2024 C. J. Okoye Lawview & Co. All Right Reserved