Construction Law (Agency) - Assignment Example

If certain guidelines of the law were over-stepped, Dick can/could be assessed as having committed a Fraud or Theft by Deception with his dealings. In fact, if Costcutters knew that Dick would be representing ‘Dick’s Dealings’ in a manner that might imply Dick was still in-charge, Costcutters may be investigated for perhaps a criminal theft conspiracy. (Barrett v. Dere) In any event, Barrett v. Dere would be a good starting point if more information about Costcutters knowledge and the liability, although the contract between Dick and Costcutters was breached by Dick’s failure to stay under spending limits and pocketing the difference (hiding the profit), seems to point towards ‘Implied Authority’ for Dick making Costcutters liable.

Question #2 Dick does have the right to engage the Architect since the ‘representation element by the Principal’ is written very clear for all to see; Dick’s Dealings. . Question #3 The courts must find there is an agency agreement between Dick and Costcutters. The agency was sold (suggesting an exchange of money) which explicitly implies a contract. Costcutters gave Dick a job title (General Manager) and his agreement with Costcutters, though maybe even oral, is a contract nevertheless.

If Dick’s contract suggest immediate termination in case of breach, the ‘reasonable amount of time for communicating this to Dick has not been met. Egregious behavior has not been addressed so it is a non sequitur. The Tripartite agreement maintains that Costcutters can be sued leaving room for an open suit directed at Dick which cannot stand on merit. The Principal-Costcutters-own the responsibility though the name, ‘Dick’s Dealings’ tends toward the opposite. It is in this purchase and facilitation where Costcutters is at fault.

Costcutters enabled these transactions by default once they bought the name ‘Dick’s Dealings’ and worked to make a profit from it using Dick as a named associate (General Manager). Dick may be sued but the direction of liability, according to the rules given, lay at the feet of