Tuesday, September 10, 2019
Construction Law (Agency) Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words
Construction Law (Agency) - Assignment Example If certain guidelines of the law were over-stepped, Dick can/could be assessed as having committed a Fraud or Theft by Deception with his dealings. In fact, if Costcutters knew that Dick would be representing ââ¬ËDickââ¬â¢s Dealingsââ¬â¢ in a manner that might imply Dick was still in-charge, Costcutters may be investigated for perhaps a criminal theft conspiracy. (Barrett v. Dere) In any event, Barrett v. Dere would be a good starting point if more information about Costcutters knowledge and the liability, although the contract between Dick and Costcutters was breached by Dickââ¬â¢s failure to stay under spending limits and pocketing the difference (hiding the profit), seems to point towards ââ¬ËImplied Authorityââ¬â¢ for Dick making Costcutters liable. Question #2 Dick does have the right to engage the Architect since the ââ¬Ërepresentation element by the Principalââ¬â¢ is written very clear for all to see; Dickââ¬â¢s Dealings. ... Question #3 The courts must find there is an agency agreement between Dick and Costcutters. The agency was sold (suggesting an exchange of money) which explicitly implies a contract. Costcutters gave Dick a job title (General Manager) and his agreement with Costcutters, though maybe even oral, is a contract nevertheless. If Dickââ¬â¢s contract suggest immediate termination in case of breach, the ââ¬Ëreasonable amount of time for communicating this to Dick has not been met. Egregious behavior has not been addressed so it is a non sequitur. The Tripartite agreement maintains that Costcutters can be sued leaving room for an open suit directed at Dick which cannot stand on merit. The Principal-Costcutters-own the responsibility though the name, ââ¬ËDickââ¬â¢s Dealingsââ¬â¢ tends toward the opposite. It is in this purchase and facilitation where Costcutters is at fault. Costcutters enabled these transactions by default once they bought the name ââ¬ËDickââ¬â¢s Dealings ââ¬â¢ and worked to make a profit from it using Dick as a named associate (General Manager). Dick may be sued but the direction of liability, according to the rules given, lay at the feet of
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.