AMB Imballaggi Plastici v Pacflex 
- Pacflex, pursuant to an unwritten agreement, could have been acting as an agent or a distributor to AMB, but in any event failed to pay several large invoices
- Could Pacflex claim the benefit of the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993?
- As the defendant, on the facts, was acting as a distributor and therefore on his own behalf, the regulations did not apply
- There was no grant of continuing authority
- Had the regulations applied, Pacflex’s activities would have been considered secondary
Posted in Commercial Law Revision Notes.
This page was last updated on 14th January 2015
© 2019 Webstroke Law - Terms