Hely Hutchinson v. Brayhead Ltd. - The Authority on Actual and Ostensible Authority

Abstract

The case of Hely Hutchinson v. Brayhead Ltd. till date is taken as authority with regards to actual and ostensible authority in an organisation and liability in terms of employees. In an organisation, is the director an agent? Does he have absolute or actual authority to single-handedly carry out actions with or without consultation from the board of directors or any other such authority? What is the doctrine of estoppel and how is it related to Actual and Ostensible Authority? Are Actual and Ostensible Authority mutually exclusive? What role does the Contract Act play in such situations? These are only a few of the many questions raised in the case. Lord Denning, Lord Pearson and the other Justices have all answered these vital questions in this case, the help of a previous landmark cases like Freeman & Lockyer v. Buckhurst Park Properties (Mangal) Ltd. was taken. This paper consists of enumerable citations of relevant cases which were used in the judgment by the Justices and also are a medium of analyzing viewpoints post Judgment. This case till date is taken as the authority in defining actual authority or ostensible authority in an organisation and it is the sheer quality of the judgment by all the Justices in this case that allows it to remain so especially considering today's context of Company's and their risky elements including the employees. Through this paper, the attempt to answer all these questions has been made and to clearly define what authority in relation to any liability or decision actually is once and for all.