Sagal v Atelier Bunz [2009]

Facts

• The claimant procured sales of jewellery for the defendant
• Although the claimant was never in control of stock, he traded in his own name

Issue

• Was the claimant protected by the Commercial buy discount xanax online Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993?

Decision

• No

Reasoning

• Conclusion on one’s own behalf cannot constitute concluding on another’s behalf
• Sagal did not negotiate or conclude on Atelier’s behalf; he simply communicated orders