Armour v. Duff & Co. [1911] ScotLR 124 (17 November 1911)

Armour v. Duff & Co. [1911] ScotLR 124 (17 November 1911)

The defenders, Duff & Company, acted as agents for a disclosed principal (the owners or mortgagees in possession of the vessel), and were not personally liable for the account for goods supplied. The owners were discoverable from the shipping register. The misleading averments by the defenders regarding ownership affected the allocation of expenses but not the substantive liability.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 124
Parties
Pursuer (appellant): Thomas W. Armour; Defenders (respondents): T. L. Duff & Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 November 1911
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House Second Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interlocutors affirmed except as to expenses.
Legal Topics
Principal and Agent Liability, Disclosed Principal, Shipbrokers' Liability, Contract for Supply of Goods, Expenses (costs) in Litigation
Commercial Law Agency Law Maritime Law Principal and Agent Liability Disclosed Principal Shipbrokers' Liability Contract for Supply of Goods Expenses (costs) in Litigation

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas W. Armour

Pursuer (appellant)

T. L. Duff & Company

Defenders (respondents)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether shipbrokers who ordered goods for a vessel are personally liable as principals or acted for a disclosed principal
  2. 2 Whether misleading averments by defenders affect entitlement to expenses

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders, Duff & Company, acted as agents for a disclosed principal (the owners or mortgagees in possession of the vessel), and were not personally liable for the account for goods supplied. The owners were discoverable from the shipping register. The misleading averments by the defenders regarding ownership affected the allocation of expenses but not the substantive liability.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interlocutors affirmed except as to expenses.

Orders

  • Dismiss the appeal and affirm the interlocutors appealed against except as to expenses.
  • Recall the finding for expenses in the interlocutors below.