Agency Cases Flashcards
Springer v Great Western Railway
A argo of tomatoes arrived at Weymouth station. The defendant railway company was contracted by the claimants to deliver the tomatoes to Covent Garden. There was a railway strike and the railway company noticing that the tomatoes were in poor condition, sold them locally.
It would have been possible for the railway company to seek the instructions of the owners of the tomatoes by sending a telegram. They had been contracted to carry, not to sell, the tomatoes. To give them the right to sell, circumstances must exist which put them in the position of agents of necessity for the owners. As the railway company could have communicated with the owners, there was no agency of necessity.
Great Northern Railway v Swaffield
There was a contract between the two parties whereby GNR agreed to transport the defendant’s horse to a particular railway station from where it would be collected.
When no one arrived to pick it up, the station master, having tried unsuccessfully to contact the defendant, placed the horse in a stable overnight.
GNR was entitled to recover the costs of stabling because it had become the agent of the defendant by necessity
Barry, Ostlere and Shepherd Ltd v Edinburgh Cork Importing Co
An order was placed by Barry, Ostlere and Shepherd with Edinburgh Cork for a supply of cork shavings. The order was placed via one of Edinburgh Cork’s salesmen. The order wasn’t fulfilled and B, O and S brought an action against Edinburgh Cork for breach of contract. The defence was to the effect that the salesmen had no authority to conclude the contract.
B, O and S were entitled to assume that the salesman did have the necessary authority to accept the order
International Sponge Importers Ltd v Andrew Watt & Sons
Cohen, a commercial travelling salesman was authorised to sell sponges on behalf of International Sponge Importers Ltd. Cohen was a regular caller to Watt & Sons and he had sold them sponges on a number of occasions in the past. Normally Watt & Sons made payment directly to International Sponge Importers (“ISI”) by sending them a cheque. On a few occasions Cohen had collected cheques from Watt which were payable to ISI and that Cohen had then passed on to ISI. On four instances Cohen had also persuaded Watt & Sons to pay with cheques made out to Cohen or by means of cash. Cohen eventually absconded with money owing to ISI.
Both the Court of Session and the HL held that ISI could not recover the missing money from the customers who had paid Cohen. They were entitled to conclude from the earlier course of dealings that Cohen did have authority to accept payment personally.
Gilmour v Clark
Gilmour, an Edinburgh merchant, gave instructions to a local carrier to take a consignment of goods to Leith docks to be loaded onto a particular ship – the Earl of Zetland. For apparently legitimate reasons the goods were loaded onto another ship, the Magnet. This ship sank en route and Gilmour’s cargo was lost.
Clark was liable to Gilmour for the loss of the goods even though the change in ship was well intentioned.
