Hi Jason, Dicta are legion, and the principle is reflected in the maxim qui facit per alium, facit per se. I paste below an extract from para 8-210 of Bowstead & Reynolds on Agency (22^nd ed). Otherwise, a good dictum is that of Lord Diplock in Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v Nattrass [1972] AC 153 at 198–199, cited in B&R para 1-028:

 

“Under the law of agency the physical acts and state of mind of the agent are in law ascribed to the principal, and if the agent is a natural person it matters not whether the principal is also a natural person or a mere legal abstraction. Qui facit per alium facit per se: qui cogitat per alium cogitat per se.

 

Best regards. Peter.

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Colleagues:

 

Does anyone know of a nice statement (judicial or otherwise) to the effect that one should not be better off acting through a representative than they would be acting themselves? There are a lot of fact patterns making that point but I haven’t found a nice statement of the principle. Any suggestions as to fact patterns or statements of principle welcomed.

 

Sincerely,

 

Jason Neyers
Professor of Law
Faculty of Law
Western University
Law Building Rm 26
e. jneyers@uwo.ca
t. 519.661.2111 (x88435)