Ratification

Where an agent acts without authority or beyond his authority, the principal may choose to adopt the contract by ratification. Ratification is only possible subject to certain conditions: if these are not complied with then the ratification will be ineffective. The conditions are as follows:

(i) The principal must have been in existence when the contract was negotiated on his behalf. Registered companies cannot ratify contracts negotiated on their behalf before their incorporation.

(ii) The agent must contract as such and name or identify the principal. In Keighley, Maxtead v. Durant [1901] the agent purchased wheat at a higher price than authorised but without revealing that he was acting as an agent. The principal purported to ratify the contract but later refused to accept delivery. The House of Lords held that he could not be liable for damages for breach of contract.

(iii) The principal cannot ratify a void contract or a forgery.

(iv) The principal must have capacity to contract both at the time the contract was negotiated and at ratification.

(v) The principal must be aware of all material facts relating to the contract. This is the general rule but a principal may ratify the acts of his agent without knowing of them, Fitzmaurice v. Bayley (1856).

(vi) Ratification must be of the whole contract.

(vii) Ratification must be subsequent, within a reasonable time and before the time fixed for performance of the contract.

Ratification is retrospective excluding: contracts of insurance, except for marine insurance, and where it would cause excessive hardship to third parties. Ratification can be express or by implication and there are no strict formal requirements except that, where the agent has contracted by deed, the ratification must also be by deed. Ratification will in many cases arise from conduct of the principal and it is sometimes difficult to identify whether an act of ratification has taken place. Thus in Forman & Co. Proprietary, Ltd v. The Ship Liddesdale [1900] a shipowner’s agent ordered extra repairs to be done to a ship beyond the scope of his authority. The shipowner later took the ship back and sold it. It was argued that the act of taking back the ship constituted ratification but the court rejected this argument saying that the shipowner had little option but to take the ship back and that ratification required some positive unequivocal act. However in other cases the court has accepted that, where an agent acted beyond his autority in buying goods and where the principal objected but later sold some of the goods, this amounted to ratification.

Where an agent accepts an offer on behalf of his principal ‘subject to ratification’, the acceptance is a legal nullity until ratification and if the offer is revoked before ratification there is no contract: Watson v. Swann (1862).

Authority by operation of the law: agency of necessity

Agency of necessity arises where the court recognises a person as having the authority of an agent to bind another person. This is subject to the following conditions:

(i) A person must have responsibility for the property of another under a pre-existing contract.

(ii) There must be some emergency which arises in connection with the property of that person.

(iii) The person charged with responsibility for the property must be unable to get instructions from the owner of the property.