Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Lovett v Carson County Homes

[2009] 2 BCLC 196

Case summary last updated at 22/01/2020 15:04 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Lovett v Carson County Homes

Company had two directors, X and Y. Was agreed that X would take over financial side of business, and Y the day-to-day operations of business. However from time to time, and with consent of Y, X would forge Y’s signatures on certain financial documents. One such document was sought to be upheld against company, and Y challenged this on grounds that he had not put his signature to it. Held:
 
·     Rule in Great Fingalldoes not apply where agent who made forged documents acted with ostensible authority.
·     Where this is case, s.44(5) acts to make contract binding on company. 
·     Additionally, is ‘much force’ in view that s.44(5) has displaced rule in Great Fingall.

Lovett v Carson County Homes crops up in following areas of law