Summary of Pole v Leask case

Spread the love

Pole v Leask (1863) .All ER 535

Facts: Agent had acted as an agent for principal in transactions with Leask for a number of years. Then principal terminated the agency but agent continued to act as if he were agent and collected money and then kept it.

Held: there was agency.

Hey There, you’re welcome once again to Ansmyques.com (short for Answer my Questions) blog, you can type the name of any case you’re looking for in the search box below or above as we’ve made summary of many cases available. have a nice time.

 

 

See also  Summary of Sachs v Miklos [1948] Case

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

WC Captcha 53 − 48 =