The worst of both worlds? High Court gives guidance on commercial agents’ rights on termination
In the recent case of Shearman v Hunter Boot Ltd, the High Court did not allow the principal (Hunter Boots) to rely on a clause that, on termination of an agency, entitled its agent to either an indemnity payment or compensation payment on the basis of which was the ‘cheapest’ option. The decision is of key importance to agents and principals.
The Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993 require that where a principal terminates an agency, in most circumstances it must make a payment to its agent. This payment can be calculated in one of two ways. The first, ‘compensation’, is a figure that reflects damage suffered by the agent as a result of the termination. The second, ‘indemnity’, reflects benefits, such as new customers or increased business, brought to the principal by the agent.
The regulations provide that the payment shall be calculated on the basis of compensation, unless the parties expressly opt for the indemnity method in their agency agreement…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Penningtons Manches briefing.
Sign in or Register to continue reading this article
It's quick, easy and free!
It takes just 5 minutes to register. Answer a few simple questions and once completed you’ll have instant access.Register now
Why register to The Lawyer
In-depth, expert analysis into the stories behind the headlines from our leading team of journalists.
Identify the major players and business opportunities within a particular region through our series of free, special reports.
Receive your pick of The Lawyer's daily and weekly email newsletters, tailored by practice area, region and job function.
More relevant to you
To continue providing the best analysis, insight and news across the legal market we are collecting some information about who you are, what you do and where you work to improve The Lawyer and make it more relevant to you.