Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
thus giving effect to the act as if originally authorized. The doctrine applies
to the ratification of the act of an agent in excess of his authority of the act
of one who purports to be an agent but who is really not. It may be implied
from the acceptance of benefits by the principal under a contract entered in
his name. The authority created by
ratification is subsequent but it is equivalent to prior authority.
Conditions to ratification: [ICK-PEC]
1.) Intent to ratify;
2.) Principal must have capacity & power to ratify;
3.) He must have had knowledge of material facts;
4.) The act must be done in behalf of the principal;
5.) Principal must ratify acts in its entirety;
6.) The act must be capable of ratification.
Effects of ratification with respect to the agent:
1.) Relieves the agent from liability to the 3rd party to the unauthorized
transaction; and
2.) To his principal for acting without authority; and
3.) He may recover compensation due for performing the act which has
been ratified.
Effects of ratification with respect to the principal:
1.) He assumes responsibility for the unauthorized act, as fully as if the
agent had acted under original authority; but
2.) He is not liable for acts outside the authority approved by his
ratification.
Effects of ratification with respect to 3rd persons:
1.) 3rd person is bound by ratification to the same extent as he would have
been bound if the ratified act had been authorized in the 1 st instance;
and
2.) He cannot raise the question of the agents authority to do the ratified
act.
Must ratification be communicated to the agent or to the 3rd party?
No. To be effective, ratification need not be communicated or made known to
the agent or the 3rd party. The act or conduct of the principal rather than his
communication is the key. But before ratification, the 3 rd party is free to
revoke the unauthorized contract.
Art. 1911. Even when the agent has exceeded his authority, the
principal is solidarily liable with the agent if the former allowed the
latter to act as though he had full powers.
Authority
estoppel
by
Arises in cases
where
the
principal, by his
negligence,
permits his agent
to exercise powers
not granted to him,
even though the
principal may have
no
notice
or
knowledge of the
conduct
of
the
agent.
In case the agent sells the goods for more than his claim, is he entitled to the
excess? No.
What is the nature of the agents right of lien?
Specific or particular. It is not general in the sense that it gives the agent a
right to retain the goods for claims disconnected with the agency.
Art. 1915. If two or more persons have appointed an agent for a
common transaction or undertaking, they shall be solidarily liable to
the agent for all the consequences of the agency.
Requisites for application of this article: [2C2]
1.) There are 2 or more principals;
2.) The principals have all concurred in the appointment of the same
agent;