Harris and Danzil Agents - Case Study Example

The agent is barred from doing things that the principal has not authorized them to do. Furthermore, the agent is under a duty to avoid a conflict of interest between him and the principal. Thus, the agent should not indulge in negotiations from which he will benefit, at the expense of the principal (Harley, 2009).

In our case, it is apparent that the appointed agents (Harris and Danzil) violated the laws guiding agency contracts, by engaging in negotiations that created a conflict of interest between them and the Principal (Investor). By establishing a corporation that was interested in the same transaction that they were undertaking for the principal, they violated the law of contracts (Harley, 2009). Since the corporation formed by the agents ended up negotiating and purchasing the business, then the principal, in our case, the Investor has a right to sue the agents for a breach of contract. The agents are then required to pay damages for the loss they caused to their principal (Harley, 2009). Therefore, the investor should terminate the contract between him and Harris, on the grounds of Harris breaching the contract, and seek legal redress for payment of damages by Harris and Danzil. Read More