House v Whitelock [1911] HCA 52

House v Whitelock [1911] HCA 52

The case was not considered appropriate for the grant of special leave to appeal to the High Court, since the conditions limiting the authority of the agent were clear and the arrangement for cancellation was not authorized by the plaintiff and not binding.

Parties
Appellant; Plaintiff: Herman House (trading as Herman House & Co.); Respondent; Defendant: James Whitelock
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 October 1911
Procedural Posture
Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the High Court From the Supreme Court of Victoria
Outcome
Special leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Authority of Agent, Conditions for Contract Cancellation, Contract Ratification, Estoppel
Contract Law Agency Authority of Agent Conditions for Contract Cancellation Contract Ratification Estoppel

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Herman House (trading as Herman House & Co.)

Appellant; Plaintiff

James Whitelock

Respondent; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Special Leave to Appeal / Application for Special Leave to Appeal to the High Court From the Supreme Court of Victoria

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant could cancel the order based on a condition agreed upon with the plaintiff's agent but not authorized by the printed form.
  2. 2 Whether the agent’s authority extended to making cancellation conditions not included on the printed order form.
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was bound by the agent’s unauthorized act, where the authorization was expressly limited on the order form.

Ratio Decidendi

The case was not considered appropriate for the grant of special leave to appeal to the High Court, since the conditions limiting the authority of the agent were clear and the arrangement for cancellation was not authorized by the plaintiff and not binding.

Court Disposition

Special leave to appeal refused.