Corporate law Brisbane

The legal relationship of agency

HomeBlogLegal insightsThe legal relationship of agency

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

The importance of establishing whether a legal relationship of agency exists, and if so, to what extent, can be critical when ascertaining whether a person had authority to enter into an agreement on behalf of another person or entity.  The precise legal nature of the relationship may be important to the parties if either are attempting to enforce their rights under an agreement between them.

What does the agency relationship involve?

An agency relation between two parties is a relationship:

involving authority or capacity in one person (the agent) to create or affect legal relations between another person (the principal) and third parties.

In other words, the agency relationship involves appointing a person or entity (Agent), to act on behalf of another person or entity (Principal) when dealing with third parties.

The agency relationship may arise by:

  • agreement between the Principal and Agent, either by express agreement or implied in a variety of ways;
  • the Principal’s ratification of actions performed by the Agent; and
  • estoppel.

The extent of the Agent’s authority

One of the most important aspects of the agency relationship is the extent of the Agent’s authority.  An Agent must act only within their authority.  Where an Agent acts outside of the scope of their authority, for example, entering into an agreement with a third party on behalf of the Principal which is outside the scope of their authority, the agreement will not be enforceable against the Principal.

There are two (2) different types of authority than an Agent may holds, these are:

  • actual authority; and
  • ostensible authority.

Actual authority

The Agent’s actual authority is that which the Principal has actually granted it.  Actual authority may be express, that is, by way of an agency agreement that states the scope of the Agent’s authority, or implied by circumstance.

Circumstances where an Agent may have the implied authority to act in a certain manner may include where there is:

  • a custom or trade in the relevant industry;
  • a course of past dealing where the Agent has performed such actions on behalf of the Principal; and
  • a need for the implied authority to make a commercial agreement, including the agency agreement itself, effective.

Ostensible authority

Ostensible authority is based on the equitable principle of estoppel.  The Agent’s ostensible authority is that which third parties would understand the Agent to be authorised to do on behalf of the Principal, based on the actions of the Principal.  In other words, if the Principal by their words or conduct (or lack thereof) “holds out” that the Agent (or alleged Agent) is authorised to perform certain acts, these acts will be within the ostensible authority of the Agent.

Rights and obligations of the Principal

The Principal will be liable for the actions of the Agent that are carried out in accordance with their authority.  The Principal is also subject to the obligations contained in the agency agreement.  These will by their nature vary between circumstances, but common obligations of Principals include:

  • remuneration of the Agent for performance of their duties; and
  • indemnification of the Agent against.

Rights and obligations of the Agent

The relationship between an Agent and their Principal is, much like that between a solicitor and their client, a fiduciary relationship.  In the agency relationship, the Agent owes a fiduciary duty to the Principal, which compels the Agent to act only in the best interests of the Principal.

The fiduciary duty prevents the Agent from acting in a manner that:

  • conflicts with the interests of the Principal; and
  • causes the Agent to gain an undisclosed, personal benefit by virtue of their position as Agent.

Outside of the fiduciary duty an Agent owes their Principal, an Agent also has other duties, including by not limited to:

  • complying with the terms of the agency agreement;
  • acting only within the scope of their authority; and
  • acting personally, that is, they must not subcontract their duties to another party.

Liability for actions of the Agent

The appointment of an Agent is a serious decision that carries great risk for the Principal.  The major source of risk arises due to the liability for actions committed by the Agent that are within the scope of their authority.

It is discussed above how the Agent can create legal obligations between the Principal and third parties that are enforceable by such third parties against the Agent.  For this reason, it is important that the authority of Agents is clearly defined, and strictly regulated, so as to avoid any liability for actions of the Agent that are outside that which was contemplated initially.

Liability for the actions on the agent in tort

The Principles liability for the actions of their Agent is not limited to commercial dealings and it extends to torts committed by the Agent against third parties when the Agent is acting within the scope of their authority. For example, where an Agent who has the authority to negotiate on behalf the Principal defames a third party in the furtherance of negotiations, the Principal may be liable as a party should the third party commence proceedings.

Links and further references

Cases

Pirie Street Stage 1 P/L v Trotman & Anor And Stewart & Ors [2015] SADC 123

Price v Southern Cross Television (TNT9) Pty Ltd [2014] TASSC 70

Sweeney v Boylan Nominees Pty Ltd [2006] HCA 19

International Harvester Company of Australia Pty Ltd v Carrigan’s Hazeldene Pastoral Co [1958] HCA 16

Further information about agency relationship

If you require further information about the agency relationship or a dispute based on this relationship, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:

Doyles Recommended TMT Lawyer 2024

Related insights about the legal relationship of agency

  • Labor plan to abolish non-compete clauses from 2027

    Labor plan to abolish non-compete clauses from 2027

    On 25 March 2025, the Albanese Labor government announced in its 2025-26 Budget (Budget), that it intended to abolish non-compete clauses in employment contracts for approximately three (3) million workers from 2027.

    Read more …

  • Damages for competitor misleading conduct under the ACL

    Damages for competitor misleading conduct under the ACL

    Section 236 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) entitles any person, including corporations – to claim compensation for loss or damage suffered from misleading or deceptive conduct.  The High Court has developed numerous general principles for assessing loss or damage which we will discuss in this article.

    Read more …

  • Changes to the Franchising Code of Conduct

    Changes to the Franchising Code of Conduct

    The current Franchising Code of Conduct (Old Code) is scheduled to “sunset” (meaning it will automatically expire unless extended or replaced) on 1 April 2025, with the Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes–Franchising) Regulations 2024 (Cth) (New Regulations) coming into effect on the same date.

    Read more …

  • New Anti-Money Laundering Bill

    New Anti-Money Laundering Bill

    On 11 September 2024 the (Bill) was introduced to the House of Representatives.[1]  The Bill will amend the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) (AML/CTF Act) to include provisions regarding deterrence, detection and disruption of money laundering and terrorism financing.[2]  Most changes will take effect from 31 March 2026.

    Read more …

  • Overview of the illegal phoenixing regime

    Overview of the illegal phoenixing regime

    The Treasury Laws Amendment (Combating Illegal Phoenixing) Act 2020 (Cth) (Amending Act) came into force on 18 February 2020 and was designed to prevent illegal phoenixing activity.  The Amending Act introduced reforms such as creditor-defeating disposition provisions to combat phoenixing activity.  Additional provisions amending the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) were aimed to encourage accountability by…

    Read more …

  • Unfair contract terms – automatic renewal clauses

    Unfair contract terms – automatic renewal clauses

    9 November 2023 was a crucial date for Australian businesses because from that date significant penalties can now be imposed on businesses found to have unfair contract terms (UCT) in their contracts.  The Federal Government had introduced significant changes to laws relating to UCT on 10 November 2022.

    Read more …

  • Australian legislation addresses loot boxes in video games

    Australian legislation addresses loot boxes in video games

    The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Loot Boxes) Bill 2022 (Bill)  has been tabled in the House of Representatives on the 28 November 2022.  The private member’s Bill acts in response to growing support for the regulation of features and elements within video games which appear to simulate gambling.

    Read more …

  • Consumer law changes – what business owners need to know

    Consumer law changes – what business owners need to know

    The Treasury Laws Amendment (More Competition, Better Prices) Act 2022 (Cth) (Act) amends various pieces of legislation to provide stronger competition and consumer protections.  In particular, the Act bolsters the penalties applicable for offences relating to unfair practices and unfair contract terms under as contained within the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA) and…

    Read more …

  • Is a proposed settlement fair and reasonable – Federal Court

    Is a proposed settlement fair and reasonable – Federal Court

    Class action lawsuits commonly resolve in a settlement between the members of a class and the respondents to a claim.  However, there are strict requirements to proposed settlements, including that they are ‘fair and reasonable’, which will be subject to judicial oversight.

    Read more …


Posted

in

Send this to a friend