tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3202774368551476669.post703506217876983029..comments2023-09-15T16:21:31.980+05:30Comments on INDIAN CORPORATE LAW: Ostensible Authority and EstoppelUmakanth Varottilhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12438677982004444359noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3202774368551476669.post-849985202962071942012-07-18T07:48:00.682+05:302012-07-18T07:48:00.682+05:30Impromptu :
Chosen at random but driven by intuit...Impromptu :<br /><br />Chosen at random but driven by intuition, requiring to be read in between lines are these:<br /><br />"The question therefore was whether Mr. Masters had the ostensible authority to tell Mr. Fraser that whatever steps needed to be taken to carry out the transaction had been duly performed, although he had no authority (actual or ostensible) to take those steps himself."<br /> “An agent cannot be said to have authority solely on the basis that he has held himself out as having it. It is, however, perfectly possible for the proper authorities of a company (or, for that matter, any other principal) to organise its affairs in such a way that subordinates who would not have authority to approve a transaction are nevertheless held out by those authorities as the persons who are to communicate to outsiders the fact that it has been approved by those who are authorised to approve it or that some particular agent has been duly authorised to approve it…” <br /><br />Well, the gut but sincere reaction is that the discussion is too brain teasing to enable a common reader but with a legal background, barring seasoned lawyers, to leave wondering what really is the 'proposition of law' that has been taken to court(s), for adjudication.<br />The issue discussed is, in one's quick perception, does not seem to be a truly legal issue; in that, is not one necessarily based on any known principle of jurisprudence e.g. principles universally accepted and broadly conceded on the so called doctrine of 'holding out'. The views the foreign courts are said to have been taken could, in one's personal oipinion, at best, be regarded to suggest a solution or a pragmatic WAY OUT (to be precise, how to get out) in circumstances (not infrequently faced with in modern times) muddled with mind boggling confusions in the minds of not only the parties to the dispute and their legal advisers but also of the adjudicating authorities.<br /><br />May I say > Over to Experts/legal luminaries for an in-depth application of mind!vswaminoreply@blogger.com