Page:Halsbury Laws of England v1 1907.pdf/411

 —

Part YIII. all

bribes

[(j)

—

— Relations

and secret

between Principal and Agent.

profits

(/)

received

by him during his

agency.

189 Sect.

2.

Rights of Sitb-Sect. 4.

Disclosure hy Agent.

Principal

404. An agent will not be allowed to pat his duty in conflict with his interest (s), and therefore he must not enter into any transaction likely to produce that result {a), unless he has first made to his

against Agent. Agent's

own

principal the fullest disclosure of the exact nature of his interest, interest in conflict with and the principal has assented {h). An agent does not discharge his that of duty in this behalf merely by disclosing that he has an interest (c), or principal. by making statements which might put the principal on inquiry {cl). In particular, notwithstanding any usage to the contrary {e), he must not sell his own property to the principal (/), nor buy the principal's property {g), without the knowledge of the principal. And in these and all other transactions Qi) with the principal, he Application must disclose every material fact which is or ought to be known by of rule. him, if it would be likely to operate upon the principal's judgment (i). If this is not done, the fairness of the transaction is immaterial {j), and it is voidable at the principal's option (k). Sub-Sect.

5.

and Bribes

Beceipt hy Agent of Secret Profits

{I).

405. An agent must not, without the knowledge of his principal acquire any profit (n) or benefit (o) from his agency (p) other than Boston Beep Sea Fishing and Ice Co. v. Ansell (1888), 39 Oh. D, 339, 371. Nantyglo and Blaina Iromvorhs Co. v. Grave (1878), 12 Ch. D. 738. (s) Bankof Upper Canada v. BradsJiaw (1867), L. R. 1 P. C. 4:19, per Lord Cairns, at p. 489 Parker v. McKenna (1874), 10 Ch. App. 96, ^er Lord Cairns, at p. 118. (a) For the cases where the transa.ction is entered into with a person with {q) (r)



whom

he is deahng on his principal's behalf, see p. 190, 'post. G-watkin v. Campbell (1854), 1 Jur. (n. s.) 131. (c) Imperial Mercantile and Credit Association v. Coleman (1873), L. R. 6 H. L. Costa Rica Bail. Co. v. Forwood, Gluckstein v. Barnes, [1900] A. C. 240 189 [1901] 1 Ch. 746. (d) Dunne v. English (1874), L. R. 18 Eq. 524 and see Swale v. Ipswich Tannery (1906), 11 Com. Cas. 88, per Kennedy, J., at p. 96. (e) Robinson v. Mollett (1875), L. R. 7 H. L. 802 Hamilton v. Young (1881), L. R. 7 It. 289. (/) GillettY. Peppercorne (1840), 3 Beav. 78; Bothschild v. Brookman (1831), 2 Dow. & CI. 188 Skelton v. Wood (1894), 71 L. T. 616. Ex parte Huth, Re Pemberton {g) McPherson v. Watt (1877), 3 App. Cas. 254 (1840), 4 Dea. 294; Loruther v. lowther (1806), 13 Yes. 95._ (b)













{h) Selsey v. Bhoades (1824), 2 Sim. & St. 41, including gifts; Hunter y. Atkins (1834) 3 My. & K. 1 1 3. As to gifts between solicitor and client, see title Solicitors. (r) Dunne v. English, supra ; Charter v. Trevelyari (1844), 11 CI. P. 714 ; King V. Anderson (1874), 8 Ir. Eq. 147 ; Savery v. King (1856), 5 H. L. Cas. 627 ; Buddy's Trustee v. Beard (1886), 33 Ch. D. 500. (y) Gillett V. Peppercorne, supra; Aberdeen Bail. Co. v. Blaikie (1854), 2 Eq. Rep. 1281. ,

&

[U] Houldsworth v. City of Glasgow Bank (1880), 5 App. Cas. 317, per Lord Cairns, at p. 323; Be Cape Breton Co. (1884), 26 Ch. D. 221 GillettY. Peppercorne, supra; Oliuer v. Court (1820), Dan. 301; Great Luxembourg Bail. v. Magnay (1858), 25 Beav. 586. [l) As to the principal's rights against the person offering the bribe, see pp. 216

et seq., post.

(m) Be Haslam, [1902]

1 Ch. 765 ; Bitchie v. Couper (1860), 28 Beav. 344. (1891), 7 T. L. R. 698. (o) Fawcett v. Whitehouse (1829), 1 Russ. & M. 132 ; Tarkwa Main Beef, Ltd. v. Merton (1903), 19 T. L. R. 367. B. 504; with which compare Kirkham v. {p) Erskine v. Sachs, [1901] 2 Peel (1881), 44 L. T. 195 and see Williamson v. Hine, [1891] 1 Ch. 390.

{n)

Thompson

v.

Meade

K



General rule