Top Left Background Top Right Background
Bottom Right Background

Summers v Salomon (1857)

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
Goto Top
Close Notification

Recent News

Other News