Rhodes v Macalister (1923)

Facts

  • An agent was instructed to sell a property for his principal, with commission being paid by the agent keeping any amount of money over a certain threshold price
  • The agent sold the property at a commissionable value, but also obtained a bonus from the buyer

Issue

  • Could the agency agreement be terminated without commission being paid?

Decision

  • Yes

Reasoning

  • A principal need not be disadvantaged by the payment of an unauthorised commission for an agent to be liable under strict fiduciary duties
  • Commission will be forfeited on any tainted services as a result of a breach of fiduciary obligations
RELATED CASE  Bedford Insurance Co v Instituto de Resseguros do Brazil [1984]

Posted in Commercial Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 31st December 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy