Quinn v CC Automotive Group 
- The claimant was, in his view sold a car a salesman of CC Automotive Group (also known as Carcraft)
- The salesman was a fraudster, who left Quinn with debt on his new and old cars
- The fraudster could not be found
- Were Carcraft liable for the fraudster’s acts?
- Although both parties to be dispute were ‘innocent’, a principal should be bound by the mistakes of his agent, not a third party to whom the agent is a stranger
- The salesman had apparent authority, and the claimant suffered to his detriment following reliance on the representation that the salesman had the authority to sell a car to him, allowing recompense
Posted in Commercial Law Revision Notes.
This page was last updated on 30th December 2014