Any word or conduct of the contracting entity incompatible with the continued exercise of the power exercised by the agent may act as a dismissal of the Agency. The main physical damage (unlike mental health) to the plaintiff is a series of disfiguring knife wounds to the head, face, arms, breasts and body. If the instruments of aggression had not included rape, the case would not arouse any curiosity or interest, as it is part of all the classic requirements for healing against the Master. The verdict is not considered excessive and could not be exaggerated given the physical injuries inflicted. An amicable termination may also take place if the agency relationship is terminated in accordance with the provisions of the contract itself. In this context, the following situations may arise: Alternatively, the Agency may be terminated by right: The Agency may be terminated by subsequent events. These can be physical, for example when the item is destroyed or the principal or agent dies or becomes mentally ill. Alternatively, they may be legal if the principal or agent goes bankrupt or the relationship becomes illegal (for example. B if the principal becomes an enemy alien).
The effect of termination is that the rights acquired at the time of termination remain in place for the customer and the representative, but no new rights can be created, at least once the agent has notified the termination. If the Agency was established by agreement, it may be determined in the same way. Is the principal obliged to conclude a contract for its sponsor or to commit an unlawful act in the course of its activities? What is the agent`s responsibility for unlawful acts and contracts entered into on behalf of his or her sponsor? How to end the relationship, so that the client or the agent no longer has any responsibility or responsibility for the actions of the other? These are the issues that are addressed in this chapter. The contracting entity is liable for the unlawful acts of the worker in two circumstances: first, where the contracting authority was directly liable, such as for the hiring of a person whom the payer knew or should have known was incompetent or dangerous; secondly, if the worker committed the unlawful act in the course of the client`s activity. This is the master-servant doctrine or the Superior Respondeat. It imposes the responsibility of the enforcement agent on the employer: the captain (employer) is liable if the employee was in the area of activity that presented a risk to the employer (criterion of the “risk zone”), that is, in general, if the employee was where he should be, when he should be there, and the incident arose from the interest of the employee (however perverted it may be), promote the employer`s business. An agency terminates automatically at the end of its mandate. If the agency was to operate a distributor for a certain period of time, it was found that the agent was obliged to leave the premises after the deadline […].