Facts
- 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
Issue
- Was the defendant liable for the acts of his nephew?
Decision
- Yes
Reasoning
- 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
