Forums › Ask ACCA Tutor Forums › Ask the Tutor ACCA LW Exams › BPP exam kit
- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by
MikeLittle.
- AuthorPosts
- February 2, 2017 at 7:53 pm #370830
Thank you Mike for your help!
I really appreciate it.
There were some other uncertain bits in other parts.1. What is the difference between agency by implied and agency by estoppel?
2. In case of Dickenson v Dodds, the third party informing Dickenson of the termination of offer, does this count as agency by ratification?
If not, what exactly is agency by ratification?3. Is actual authority given to the agent only in the case of agency by express?
4. What is the publicity requirements of the partnership?
5. What does it mean by ‘partnerships can grant fixed charges only?’
Again, thank you very much for your help.
February 2, 2017 at 9:25 pm #370836Implied agency is where, given the facts of the situation, the court will declare that an agency arrangement is apparent. It’s too close to an express agency arrangement for the court to consider anything else other than an agency arrangement
Agency by estoppel is where one party has knowingly allowed the other to act as though that other actually did have authority
Then along comes a transaction that the first party doesn’t like so he tries to claim that the other party doesn’t have authority
Having previously allowed that other to act as agent, the first party cannot now claim (so, is estopped from claiming) lack of authority
“In case of Dickenson v Dodds, the ….. , does this count as agency by ratification?” No, not at all
Ratification is where one party (a supposed agent) enters into a contract for another (the supposed principal) without authority. When challenged, that supposed principal may turn round and, provided they’re not estopped, say “He’s no agent of mine” or equally he could ratify the action and say “Yes, ok, I’ll take on the liability of this contract”
I’m going to say “Yes” to question 3
4 – What do you want? You and I enter a partnership – no formal documents. Possibly no documents at all. We would have to inform the tax authorities but that’s basically it
We can, of course, go a lot deeper into this with formal agreements and headed notepaper … but it’s not necessary
A partnership is simply a collection of individuals and, as such, does not have a separate legal identity. You can borrow money and pledge as security your home – it’s called a mortgage! But you cannot, as an individual, pledge as security your Accounts Receivable
Similarly, a collection of ‘you’s can borrow money and pledge as security the property over which a fixed charge will exist but a partnership cannot use accounts receivable or inventory to secure their borrowings
OK?
- AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.