Page:Halsbury Laws of England v1 1907.pdf/457

 ——

.

Part XI.

Duration and Termination of Agency.

235

Sect. 4. the agent has a right of lien on goods of the principal such right is not affected by the principal's Termination by Operabankruptcy (/). If

their proceeds,

or

If there have been mutual credits or dealings between the principal and agent, the agent is entitled to a right of set-off against all moneys of the principal received before the date of the receiving order and without notice of the act of bankruptcy (g). Subject to the above rules and to what is stated above as to irrevocable authorities (h), an agent who continues to act after he has had notice that his principal has committed an act of bankruptcy takes the risk of being held personally liable, if adjudication follows on a petition presented within three months of such act of

tion of

Law.

Mutual credits.

Liability of

agent acting after bankruptcy.

bankruptcy (i) So a trustee in bankruptcy has a right of action against an agent "who, with notice of an act of bankruptcy by his principal, sells his principal's goods and pays the proceeds to the principal (k).

The bankruptcy of an agent determines the agency®, where the act which he is authorised to do is merely a iormal one (/«), or where the bankruptcy does not make him less fit and competent for the proper performance of his duties {n). Whether it does so or not depends on the nature of his duties and terms of his appointment (n). 492.

•except

493. The onus

of

proving want of notice of an act of bankruptcy Onus

Tests on the person relvins: o thereon ^

Sect.

5.

Bankruptcy of agent.

of proving notice of bankruptcy.

(o).

Notice of Termination, lohen necessary.

494. The cases in which notice of termination has been held to Where third be necessary are all cases in which a third person had been person led to believe in induced to believe through the act of the principal that the agent authority. had authority, and therefore depend on the principle of estoppel {p). The belief may have been induced through the principal giving the agent express authority to do certain acts(^), or through his having v. Goodiuin (1775), Cowp. 251. Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Yict. c. 52), s. 38; Elliott v. Turquand and Palmer v. Day, [1895] 2 Q. B. 618 (as to what con<1881), 7 App. Cas. 79 stitutes mutual credits) The rule does not apply to the case of a sum paid to an

(/) Drinkiuater

{g)



.

Follitt, Ex parte Minor, [1893] 1 Q. B. 455). credits within sect. 171 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1849 (12 & 13 Yict. c. 106), see Young v. Bank of Bengal (1836), 1 Moo. P. C. 0. 150; Kaoroji v. Chartered Bank of India (1868), L. E. 3 C. P. 444 ; and Astley v.

agent for a

specific

Eor meaning

of

purpose {Re

mutual

Gurney (1869), L. E. 4 0. P. 714. {h) See p. 228, ante. Kynaston v. Crouch (1845), (?) Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Yict. c. 52), s. 43 14 M. & W. 266 Re Lamb, Ex parte Gibson (1886), 55 L. T. 817. {k) King v. Leith (1787), 2 Term Eep. 141. [1) Parker v. Smith (1812), 16 East, 382. (m) Dixon v. Ewart [l^ll), 3 Mer. 322. {n) McCallY. Australian Meat Co. (1870), 19 W. E. 188; Hudson v. Granger <(1821), 5 B. & A. 27; Phelps v. Lyle (1839), 10 A. &E. 113. (o) Pearson v. Graham (1837), 6 A. & E. 899. (p) Trueman v. Loder (1840), 11 A. & E. 589; Scarf y. Jardine (1882), 7 App.



•Cas. 345, at p. 349. (q)

P.

&

V.

F. 894



Gurleiuis Harrison (1699), 12 Mod. Eep. 346 Pole v. Leask (1864), 33 L. J. (CH.) 155.

v.

Birkbeck (1863), 3