Law of Agency

This was a group assignment but please excuse me for any mistakes as i could not wait for the other members to submit their part, so I did the research and wrote this paper by myself and of course presented it together with the group members.

Welcome back to Court Uncourt - your definitive source for all things legal. As we grow and diversify our presence, we continue to be guided by our core principles and deliver you bespoke legal information that is relevant, important and insightful for you and your business. Court Uncourt continues to look for context and insght that pique your curiosity. The present issue covers topics that aim at putting your curiosity to rest and at the same time increase your understanding on key legal matters you should know!

We take this opportunity to thank everyone for their overwhelming feedback and interest in Court Uncourt. Not only are we seeing developments in the legal universe, we at STA are also in process of some exciting advances. What are these, you may ask? Watch this space and the next issue as we deliver on putting your curiosity to rest. Thanks for reading!

This feature of Court Uncourt covers diverse topics including:-

1. Registration of Colour Marks - Overview of Trademark Law of UAE and Global Overview

2. Commercial Agency Law of Qatar

3. Crash and Splash - Maritime Collisions under UAE Maritime and Shipping Law

4. Sherlock Homes of Today - Role of Forensics in Criminal Investigations under UAE Law

5. Arbitration in UAE

6. Sports Law in UAE

7. Bitcoins -Decrypting the Currency

The world we live in is just one of the worlds. The world of the animals has never been faced with the shortage of means of sustenance. Following from this, it burgeons upon my mind to state without reservation and fear of equivocation that our present conundrum is a product of our machinations. The brain behind our present predicament is the evil corruption which has eaten deep into the very fabric of our society. Corruption is an international scourge, it pervades every walks of life and it can be said to be all-encompassing. It is audible to the deaf as well as visible to the blind. It has become, quite unfortunately, the air we breathe in this part of the world. We are all victims of one corrupt practice or the other. It is also worthy of note that corruption is not peculiar to Africa. It is common to all governments and countries of the world. Its effects are more visible here simply because, the rate at which it is perpetrated with impunity is beyond imagination and the enforcement machinery of the criminal justice system has been compromised ipso-facto rendering the said body of laws regulating the actions of these reprobate

In the Gospel of John chapter 5, Jesus healed a lame man at the Pools of Bethesda in Jerusalem.

John 5:18 has been one of the standard passages that Trinitarians interpret as evidence for the deity of Jesus. According to the Trinitarian claim, the statement that Jesus "made himself equal with God" is to be understood that Jesus is "co-equal" and of the same substance as God, and therefore is God himself. It is often said that the Jewish leaders' correctly interpreted Jesus calling God his Father as a claim to be God. The reason why Jesus couldn't be accused of blasphemy was because he was God (or so the claim goes).

My position is that neither Jesus calling God his own Father, nor the statement about Jesus "making himself equal with God" should be understood as a claim of deity (a metaphysical equality of essence with God). Rather, both Jesus's calling God his own Father, and the statement about Jesus "being equal with God" should be understood in light of the law of agency, as an equality of representative authority, encapsulated in the Hebraic proverb: "the one sent is equal to his sender"
השליח שוה לשולחו
שְּׁלוּחוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם כְּמוֹתוֹ

Traditional businesses thus existed in the past with least involvement of intermediaries. The rapid development of international trade has warranted the involvement of these intermediate parties to an ever increasing extent. In a competitive market economy, the involvement of these parties has brought tremendous attention on the principals for creating fruitful agency relationships. Throughout these modern era on carriage of goods’ business; the industry has witnessed not only the increasing drive towards employing such agents but also the impacts that such activity has caused on the trade, thus focusing the advantages of using their services in cutting the edge over the competitors. While Port-to-Port carriage functions are quite extensively regulated under international law and through its corresponding local statutes, much of the functions involved in ‘beyond Port-to-Port’ carriage obligations tend rely on common law determinants. In such circumstance, the present work focuses on the law relating to developing aspects of such activities conducted by especially the agents so involved, namely the ship’s agents and freight forwarders who perform bulk of the representative functions in the carriage chain in relation to multi modal transportation.  In the foregoing, the author suggest certain acceptable models that can be readily applied by these agents in carrying out their functions in line with the developing trends while keeping in mind the implication of the law that they may be faced with.

A company, as an artificial legal person, must act or make decisions through human intermediaries. The doctrine of ostensible authority provides a mechanism for a corporate principal (P) to enter into contract with a third party (TP) through the company’s agent (A), even if he is not actually authorized to do so. While the rules of agency have been largely presumed to be undisputed (Worthington (2017) 133 L.Q.R. 118), one intractable question remains unsettled: under what circumstances would TP be enjoined from relying on ostensibly authority because he knew or ought to have known that A did not have actual authority? Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury sitting as the non-permanent judge in the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal in Thanakharn Kasikorn Thai Chamkat (Machalon) v Akai Holdings Ltd [2011] 1 H.K.C. 357; (2010) 13 H.K.C.F.A.R. 749 turned the orthodox tide, and introduced a novel “dishonesty-irrationality” threshold for TP to be put on inquiry. The decision - despite being subjected to trenchant academic critiques (Watts & Reynolds, Bowstead & Reynolds on Agency, 21st edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2017) at [8-49]-[8-50]; Watts (2015) L.M.C.L.Q. 36, 48-56) - has been followed by an agglomeration of English authorities (Quinn v CC Automotive Group Ltd (trading as Carcraft) [2010] EWCA Civ 1412; [2011] 2 All E.R. (Comm) 584; Newcastle International Airport Ltd v Eversheds LLP [2012] EWHC 2648 (Ch); [2013] P.N.L.R. 66; Gaydamak v Leviev [2012] EWHC 1740 (Ch); Acute Property Developments Ltd v Apostolou [2013] EWHC 200 (Ch); [2013] Bus. L.R. D22; LNOC Ltd v Watford Association Football Club Ltd [2013] EWHC 3615 (Comm); PEC Ltd v Asia Golden Rice Co Ltd [2014] EWHC 1583 (Comm)). The time is ripe for the point to be re-visited, preferably by an appellate court at the highest level. Thankfully, the Privy Council decision East Asia Co Ltd v PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo [2019] UKPC 30 with the advice delivered by Lord Kitchin fills this salient gap, providing a timely clarification to an area of law which has become rather muddled since Akai.

Recent years have seen a marked increase in the number of attorneys switching firms, many of whom seek to take with them the business of their former firm’s clientele.  While the contours of permissible departure-based solicitation were once clearly and narrowly circumscribed by the rules of legal ethics, the continued validity of those restrictions is seriously placed in doubt by the principles enunciated in Supreme Court decisions of the past decade dealing with commercial speech about legal services.

In this Article, Professor Johnson endeavors to comprehensively chart and evaluate the myriad of aspects of the new jurisprudence on departure-based solicitation which is now emerging in piecemeal fashion from court decisions, ethics opinions, and legal scholarship.  The Article considers both the disciplinary ramifications of such conduct, and the closely related question of whether such solicitation may give rise to civil liability under the law of torts or the law of agency.  Concluding that certain varieties of departure-based solicitation are ultimately likely to be deemed permissible, Professor Johnson discusses the issue of whether, and by what means, a firm may endeavor to protect itself from loss of clients to an attorney who leaves the firm.  Finally, a model rule of ethics is proposed for the purpose of rectifying, in a manner consistent with Supreme Court precedent, the current precedential confusion in the field.

The fracas leading up to and after Sotheby's New York sale this year,of Jean-Michel Basquiat's 1983 work, Flesh and Spirit, highlights basic lessons that every collector must learn. The mechanisms discussed are starting points for becoming a savvier buyer at auction. This is especially important when the auction house is mainly cone􀄯med with selling any artwork, unclear title notwithstanding, and may not have the buyer's best interests at heart.