Moore v Piretta [1998]

Facts

  • A commercial agent had been engaged by the principal to sell clothes over a series of agency contracts, each immediately following the previous
  • The final contract was terminated

Issue

  • Was the agent entitled to a regulation 17 indemnity for just the previous contract, or for all of the successive contracts?

Decision

  • All of the successive contracts

Reasoning

  • “Agency contract” within regulation 17(1) of the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 should be interpreted as meaning “the agency”
  • The relationship, or the agency, stretched over all of the successive contracts
  • An indemnity of £92,000 was calculated in accordance with regulation 17(3), but regulation 17(4) capped the indemnity to ~£64,000
RELATED CASE  The Frost Express [1996]

Posted in Commercial Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 1st January 2015

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy