32 / 342
GAZETTE
JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1987
(7)
Interest
An agent is obliged to pay in-
terest in respect of money receiv-
ed on behalf of the principal.
111
An agent is under a duty to pay
interest where there has been
some default on his or her
behalf.
112
Thus an agent is obliged
to pay interest on all sums in
respect of fraud
113
as well as
bribes
114
and secret profits
115
received.
(Concluded)
FOOTNOTES
57.
Sheridan
v
Higgins
[19711 IR 291; and
KeayvFenwick
(1876) 1 C.P.D. 745.
Cf.
Dyas
v
Stafford
(1881) 7 LR Ir 590.
58.
De Bussche
v
Alt
(1878) 8 Ch.D. 286,
per
Theisiger L. J. at pp.310-11.
59. Murdoch,
ibid.
pp.55-56.
60.
Betteley
v
Reed
(1843) 4 QB 511;
Sheridan
v
New Quay Co.
(1858) 4
CBNS 618.
61.
Dixon
v
Hamond
(1819) 2 B & Aid
310;
Lyell
v
Kennedy
(1889) 14
App.Cas. 437. Cf.
Williams
v
Pott
(1871) LR 12 Eq. 149.
62.
Biddle
v
Bond
(1856) 6 B & S 225.
63.
B/austein
v
Maltz, Mitchell & Co.
[19371 2 KB 142,
per
Scott LJ at
p. 156.
64.
Op.cit.,
fn. 1, at p. 151.
65.
Blaustein
v
Maltz, Mitchell & Co.
[1937] 2 KB 142
per
Slesser LJ at
151-4.) Closely related to an agent's
duty to keep accounts is the duty of an
agent to keep the principal's property
separate from his or her own. This du-
ty depends on the agency agreement
itself: cf.
Henry
v
Hammond
; [19131 2
KB 515.
66.
Gray
v
Haig
(1855) 20 Beav 219;
Dadsweil
v
Jacobs
(1887) 34 ChD
278. If the agent does not keep ac-
counts then every presumption consis-
tent with the facts weighs against the
agent and in favour of the principal: see
Gory
v
Haig
(1855) 20 Beav. 219.
67.
Bousfield
v
Wilson
(1846) 16 LJ Ex 44;
Booth
v
Hodgson
(1795) 6 Term Rep
405.)" (p. 152
Cf. Qe Mattos
v
Ben-
jamin
(1894) 63 LJQB 248;
Harry
Parker Ltd.
v
Mason
[1940] 2 KB 590;
and
Murray
v
Mann
(1848) 2 Exch
528. An agent is not obliged to pro-
duce accounts to any person with
whom he or she has a reasonable
dispute.
Dadsweil
v
Jacobs
(1887) 34
ChD 278.
68.
Hippisley
v
Knee
[1905] 1 KB 1 at 9
per
Kennedy J.
69. p. 160.
Cf. Hippisley
v
Knee, ibid.
70. p. 157.
71.
Boardman
v
Phipps
[1965] 1 All ER
849 at 856 Cf.
Reading
v
AG
[1951]
AC 507;
Swain
v
Law Society
11982]
2 All ER 827.
72.
De Bussche
v
Alt
(1878) 8 ChD 286.
Cf. Boardman
v
Phibbs
[1967] 2 AC 46
(HL) and [1965] 1 All ER 849 at 856
per
Lord Denning.
73. (1867) 20 LT 218.
74. (1891) 7 TLR 698
75. Boston Deep Sea Fishing and ice Co.
c
Anse/i
(1888) 39 Ch.D. 339;
An-
drews
v
Ramsey
[ 1903) 2 KB 635.
76. It is possible to discuss this duty in the
context if secret profits, see
supra
the
text accompanying footnotes 68-75,
but it is as well to discuss it separate-
ly for the purposes of exposition.
77.
Boston Deep Sea Fishing & Ice Co.
v
Ansel/ ibid,
fn.75;
Swa/e
v
Ipswich
Tannery Ltd. ibid,
fn.75.
78. The criminal law relating to bribery
need not concern us in the present
context.
79.
Industries & General Mortgage Co.
Lewis
[1914] 2 All E.R. 573,
per
Slade
J., at 575;
Cf. Taylor
v
Walker
(1958)
1 Lloyd's Rep. 490;
Panama etc.
Telegraph Co.
v
India Rubber Etc.,
TelegraphWorks
(1875) LR 10 Ch App
51 5, at 526. An agent is not liable to
recover an unpaid bribe from a third
party:
Harrington
v
Victoria Graving
Docks
(1878) 3 QBD 549;
Meadow
Schama & Co.
v C.
Mitchell & Co. Ltd.
(1973) 228 E.G. 1151.
80.
Boston Deep Sea Fishing & ice Co.
v
Anseii, ibid.,
fn.75;
Swale
v
Ipswich
Tannery Ltd., ibid,
fn.75.
81.
ibid,
fn.75.
82.
Rhodes
v
Macalister
(1923) 29 Com.
Cas. 19;
Shipway
v
Broadwood
(1899)
1 QB 369.
83.
Andrews
v
Ramsay
[19031 2 KB 635;
Fulwood
v
Hurley
[1928] 1 KB 325.
84. Cf. text accompanying fn.2,
supra.
85.
ibid.,
fn.83.
86.
Cf. Boston Deep Sea Fishing & Ice Co.
v
Ansel/, ibid.,
fn.75;
E. Green & Son
Ltd.
v
Tughan& Co.
(1913) 30 TLR 64;
Fulwood
v
Hurley, ibid.,
fn.83.
87.
Mahesan
v
Malaysian Goivernment Of-
ficers' Co-operative Housing Society
Ltd.
[1979] AC 374;
Hovenden & Sons
v
Mi/ihoff
(1900) 83 Lt 41.
88.
Re Morvah Consols Tin Mining Co.,
McKay's Case
(1875) 2 Ch.D. 1.
89.
G. W. insurance Co.
v
Cuniiffe
(1874)
9 Ch.App. 525;
Re Has/am
(1902) 1
Ch. 765;
Baring
v
Stanton
(1876) 3
Ch.D. 502;
Norreys
v
Hodgson
(1897)
13 TLR 421;
Queen of Spain
v
Parr
(1869) 39 LJ Ch 73;
Green
v
Tughan
(1913) 30 TLR 64.
Cf. Fulwood
v
Hurley
(1928) 1 KB 498.
90.
Shipway
v
Broadwood
[18991 1 QB
369.
91. This can be of critical importance but
it is a point which is not beyond
dispute.
92. Cf. Jones (1970) 86 LQR 463; Chitty
on Contracts,
(op.cit., fn. 1) vol. //,
paras. 2301-4.
93. Where the agent merely introduces the
business there may also be no liability
in contract: cf.
Cherry Ltd.
v
Allied in-
surance Brokers Ltd.
[19781 1 Lloyd's
Rep. 274.
94. Cf.
Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd.
v
Mardon
[1976] QB 801.
95.
Smityv Price
(1862) 2 F & F 748;
Maydew
v
Forrester
(1814) 5 Taunt
615;
Neiison
v
James
(1882) 9 QBD
546; Cf.
Lewcock
v
Bromley
(1920)
127 LT 116;
Keppel
v
Wheeler
[1927]
1 KB 577.
Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd.
v
Quah BengKee
[1924] AC 177.
96. Cf.
Mainwaring
v
Brandon
(1818) 2
Moore CP 125;
Re United Service Co.,
Johnston's Oaim
(1871) 6 Ch App 212.
97.
Hadley
v
Baxendaie
(1854) 9 Exch.
341;
Boyd
v
Fitt
(1864) 11 LT 280;
Czarnikow
v
Koufos, The Heron li
11969] 1 AC 350;
Jarvix
v
Swan's
Tours Ltd.
[1973] 1 QB 223;
Jackson
v
Horizon Holidays Ltd.
[1975] 1 WLR
1468;
Woodar Investments Develop-
ment Ltd.
v
Wimpey Construction (UK)
Ltd.
[1980] 1 WLR 277; Cf.
Cia. Finan-
ciera "Soieada"
v
Hamoor Tanker
Corpn. inc. (The Borag)
[1981] 1 WLR
274 for the position in tort.
98. "See
Osman
v
J. Ralph Moss Ltd.
[19701 1 Lloyd's Rep. 313, CA, where
insurance brokers had grossly misled
the principal as to the financial standing
of an insurance company, with the
result that the principal became unin-
sured and was convicted for driving
while uninsured. Cf.
R. Leslie Ltd.
v
Reliable Advertising and Addressing
Agency Ltd.
[1915] 1 KB 652; see also
Askey
v
Go/den Wine Co. Ltd.
[19481
2 All ER 35, . . ."
99.
Haisbury's Laws of England,
4th ed.,
para. 784.
100. E.g.
Boston Deep Sea Fishing and ice
Co. vAnselH
1888) 39 Ch.D. 339 at
357,
per
Cotton LJ and at p.364
per
Bowen LJ. Cf
Andrews
v
Ramsay
[1903] 2 KB 635.
101. Cf.
Harsant
v
Blaine, MacDonald &
Co.
(1887) 56 LJQB 511.
102.
Great Western insurance Co. of New
York
v
Cuniiffe
(1874) 9 Ch App 525
at 541. Cf.
Seeger
v
Copydex Ltd. (No.2)
[1969] 1 WLR 809;
English
v
Dedham
Vale PropertiesLtd.
(1971 1 WLR 93.
103. Boston Deep Sea Fishing and ice Co.
v
Ansell
(1888) 39 Ch.D. 339 at p.
364
per
Bowen LJ;
James & Co.
Scheepvaart en HandeimijBVv Chine-
crest Ltd.
[1979] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 126.
104.
Re Parker
(1882) 21 ChD 403, CA.
Generally, the principal is not entitled
to recover from the agent any money
already paid over for an illegal pur-
pose: cf.
Re Parker, ibid.
105.
Dale
v
Soilet
(1767) 4 Burr. 2133.
106.
Wilkinson
v
North Suburban Proper-
ties Ltd.
(1959) 174 EG 213, CA. Cf.
Struthers
v
Smith
1913 2 SLT 1 55.
107. Cf.
Parkinson
v
Hanbury
(1867) LR 2
HL 1.
108. E.G.
Kenney
v
Hall, Pain & Foster
(1976) 239 EG 355;
LB Martin Con-
struction Ltd.
v
Gagiiardi
(1977) ILR
1-1061.
109. Cf.
Bronester Ltd.
v
Priddie
[1961] 1
WLR 1294;
Rivoii Hats Ltd.
v
Gooch
[1953] 1 WLR 1190;
Clayton Newbury
Ltd.
v
Findlay
[1953] 1 WLR 1194n.
110. Normally an agent who acquires infor-
maion in the course of an agency must
use that information solely for the pur-
poses of that agency: see
Peter Pan
Manufacturing
Corp.
v
Corsets
SilhouetteLtd.
[1963] 3 All ER 402.
111.
Webster
v
British Empire Mutual Life
Assurance Co.
(1880) 15 ChD 169,
CA. Cf. /foyers v
Boehm
(1799) 2 Esp.
702;
Burdick
v
Garrick
(1870) 5 Ch.
App. 233;
Lord Chjedworth
v
Ed-
wards
(1802) 8 Ves. 46.
113.
Earl of Hardwicke
v
Vernon
(1808) 14
Ves. 504.
114. Boston Deep Sea Fishing and ice Co.
v
Ansell, ibid.,
at footnote 75.
11 5.
Nantyglo and Biaina ironworks Co.
v
Grave
(1878) 12 ChD 738.
2 3