Divide & Conquer!


- a 'Freelance Informer' legal article from Roger Sinclair


‘I’ve been getting the run around from an agency and a client;  the agency arranged an interview in Germany and said the client would pay.  I arranged the flights myself;  at the interview the client said to send the bill for expenses to the agency.  That was 13 weeks ago, and still neither has paid – each tells me to stop pestering them, and claims it’s down to the other.’

 

It’s my experience that where two parties each try to pass the buck to the other, the best tactic is simply to go for both.  So we need to find a way to base claims against both the agency and the client – and then to make clear to both that you will not simply let it drop.  At that point I suspect they will find a way to agree between them which should bear the cost, and one or other of them will pay you.

 

In this industry we use the term ‘agent’ in a fairly broad way – the person we think of as the agent is in fact a man-in-the-middle, an independent business in his own right, making money by acting as an introducer and facilitator, and not owing any particular duties to anyone, over and above those expressly accepted in the contracts he enters.  He’s not generally an agent, in the legal sense of the term.

 

Certain types of relationship are recognised by the law as having particular characteristics;  once those characteristics are established, other legal consequences automatically follow, as a result of the intrinsic nature of the relationship, even without specific agreement between the parties.  Some of those legal consequences only affect the parties themselves –others also affect third parties.

 

The employer-employee relationship is a good example;  where the employer-employee relationship exists, other legal consequences automatically follow, such as a duty on the part of the employee to act faithfully towards the employer;  and also consequences affecting third parties – if, for example, the employee is negligent in the course of his work, and causes loss to a third party, then the third party can sue the employer directly, under a principle called ‘vicarious liability’ – an employer is liable for the torts (negligence is a tort) of his employees in the course of the employee’s duties.

 

Another such relationship, less well understood by non-lawyers, is the relationship of agent and principal.  The essence of this relationship is that the agent is authorised to enter contracts with third parties, which will then be binding on the principal.  And so far as third parties are concerned, where an agent appears to be acting on behalf of a principal, the agent by implication warrants that what he is doing is in fact within the scope of his authority – the third party does not need to specifically check the actual scope of the agent’s authority.

 

In most situations in this industry, the person we think of as an agent is not in fact acting as an agent in the legal sense of the term - but here, I think it is clear that the agent was acting as agent-in-law for its principal, the Client.  The agent, on behalf of the Client,  asked you to attend an interview with the Client, and told you that the Client would pay your travelling expenses.  You agreed, arranged your flights, and attended the interview.  Clearly I think we have a contract formed, between you and the Client, via the Client’s agent.  So you have a clear contractual basis to claim against the Client.

 

However, the Client says it’s down to the agent – in effect, the Client is saying that the agent did not have its authority to make the arrangement on its behalf.  I don’t see that that can really stand up – but it does give you the grounds to also take action against the agent, because we would say that by entering the contract, the agent was by implication warranting to you (as a term of the contract) that he had authority to enter the arrangement on behalf of the Client – and if he did not in fact have that authority, then he would be in breach of that warranty.  So we have also have the legal basis for making a claim against the agent.

 

Now, since we have the right to claim against both of them, it also follows that we can do so by bringing one claim rather than two – and since the claim against one of them (the agent) is clearly one where the English courts have jurisdiction, it follows that we can also sue the German client in the English courts.

 

From a practical point of view, you now need to write once more to both agent and Client, spelling out that unless your expenses are paid within (say) seven days, you will commence legal action against both of them in the English Courts.  I strongly suspect that once each sees they will no longer be able to pass the buck to the other, one of them will finally pay you.

 

So the simple answer is to sue both - and to do it in the UK. 

 

But of course, all this could have been avoided if you had insisted on the agency providing you with the ticket, rather than buying it yourself!

21st July 2000


I'd really appreciate your feedback on this FAQ - so mail me and tell me what you think of it, if it's been useful to you, or let me know of any specific problem you have where I may be able to help.

[Return to Top]

[Return to Roger Sinclair's 'Welcome' page]


No liability is accepted for any inaccuracy in the information in these pages - see full disclaimer

© Roger Sinclair roger@egos.co.uk 2000 - All rights reserved - see full copyright details


Disclaimer of liability:

The information on these pages is provided free and for information only, and is provided 'as is'. Whilst believed to be correct, it is in no way comprehensive. It is provided for your interest only and is not intended to be relied on as formal legal advice. The posting of information on these pages is not intended to create a lawyer-client relationship, and you should not act or rely on this information without seeking professional advice. No liability is accepted therefore for any errors, or for any losses that may be incurred if it is relied on.

[Return to Top]


Copyright details:

You may read these pages on-line, and download them to read later, for your own personal use.
This copyright notice must appear on every page that you print from here.
You must not redistribute these pages or any part of them in any form or medium without first obtaining my consent.
You are welcome to set up links to this website from others.

[Return to Top]

[Return to Roger Sinclair's 'Welcome' page]