Secretarial practice

Bibliographic data

Monograph

Identifikator:: 1828236004

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-249926

Document type:: Monograph

Title:: Secretarial practice

Edition:: fourth edition

Place of publication:: Cambridge

Publisher:: W. Heffer & Sons Ltd

Year of publication:: 1930

Scope:: viii, 987 Seiten

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Chapter

Document type:: Monograph

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Chapter XXI. Powers of attorney

Collection:: Economics Books

280 SECRETARIAL PRACTICE (4) This section applies to payments and acts made and done before or after the commencement of this Act, and in this section ‘power of attorney’ includes a power of attorney implied by statute. Express A power of attorney, even though executed under seal, Revocation. may be revoked by parol [R. v. Wait (1823) 1 Bingh. 121]. In practice, however, express revocation by the donor should be effected by deed. It is also open to the donee to effect revocation by giving notice to the donor that he renounces the power. Implied The common law was thus laid down by Lord Blackburn in Revocation. Debenham v. Mellon (1880), 6 A.C. at p. 36: ‘Where an agent is clothed with an authority and afterwards that authority is revoked, unless the revocation has been made known to those who have dealt with him, they would be entitled to say: “The principal is precluded from denying that the authority continued to exist, which he had led us to believe, as reasonable people, did formerly exist.””’ But there is left the problem which dwells in those words in Lord Blackburn’s judgment (above)—‘as reasonable people.” The expression suggests at once that there is such a thing as implied revocation, and that the third party may be deemed to have constructive, as distinct from actual, notice of revocation. There are many circumstances which would be held to amount to such an implication, e.g. the appointment by the principal of another attorney—especially if the second attorney were invested with powers, the exercise of which would clash with the authority of the first; a lapse of time since the creation of the power, such as would lead any ordinary man to doubt the probability of its continued currency; the intervention of the principal himself in the conduct of the business for which the power had been origin- ally granted. Similarly, if a donor says that the attorney is to act only when he is himself prevented from acting, a third party may be at his wits’ end to know what to do. In all such cases the third party would be justified in requir- ing proof of the continuing validity of the power of attorney. The first paragraph of s. 124 (2), which is printed above in italics, enables the third party to obtain protection by requir- ing the attorney to make a statutory declaration as therein provided. Such a declaration, however, will not protect a third party who is in fact aware, of his own knowledge, that the power has been revoked [Mutual Provident Land Vv. Macmillan (1889), A.C. 596]

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Secretarial practice

Monograph

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Monograph

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation