Summers v Salomon (1857)
- The defendant principal owned a jewellery shop, which employed his nephew as agent
- After leaving the shop, the nephew ordered jewellery from suppliers
- After taking delivery of the jewellery, the nephew disappeared
- Was the defendant liable for the acts of his nephew?
- Although actual authority has been terminated, the defendant’s representation of his nephew’s authority was continuing, and therefore the nephews apparent authority still existed
Posted in Commercial Law Revision Notes.
This page was last updated on 30th December 2014