When an agency relationship is created, it confers on the parties obligations which must be fulfilled by the parties. These obligations do not remain forever as they can come to an end. This can be done under normal circumstances by the act of the parties or by operation of the law and when the conduct of the agent is in contradiction to the mandate agreement as may be the case if the agent is liable for serious misconduct as provided by the OHADA Uniform Act on General Commercial Law. The provisions of the act regarding termination on grounds of serious misconduct is worrisome, as the act talks about termination in such manner only for commercial agents and is silent about the other two types of agents: the broker and the commission agent. The act also, does not tell us what this serious misconduct it mentions by the commercial agent is, nor gives us insights on what constitutes such conduct to warrant termination of the mandate of the agent by the principal. When termination of the agency is done under conditions as such, it has grave consequences on the agent who might not be entitled to certain benefits associated with termination of the contract such as loss of the right to compensatory allowance or indemnity and more importantly may give room to arbitrary or wrongful termination of the mandate of the agent. Through analytical and comparative studies, this paper focuses on termination of the mandate of an agent under the OHADA Uniform Act on General Commercial Law, wherein, the different modes of termination of the mandate of an agent have been discussed, and more specifically makes an attempt in looking at what serious misconduct is and what could amount to such conduct so as to avoid arbitrary or wrongful termination. It is therefore suggested that, statutory guidelines found in other statutes in relation to the subject matter can serve as a lamp light in our context.