xs
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

Lovett v Carson County Homes [2009] 2 BCLC 196

Country:
United Kingdom
  • 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 Fingall does 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.

Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch