Page 1

Roberts v Ogilby
(1821) 9 Price 269, 147 ER 89, [1814-23] All ER Rep 682

Court: Exch Ct

Judgment Date: 17/05/1821

Catchwords & Digest

AGENCY - NATURE AND FORMATION - EVIDENCE OF AGENCY - IN GENERAL - ACTING ON

CONTRACT
A contract establishing between contracting parties the relation of principal and agent is made absolute in
law by the agent acting under it.

AGENCY - RELATIONS BETWEEN PRINCIPAL AND AGENT - DUTIES OF AGENTS TO PRINCIPALS -

ESTOPPEL IN RESPECT OF RIGHTS AND TITLE OF PRINCIPAL - AGENT CANNOT DISPUTE HIS
PRINCIPAL'S TITLE
A broker who has received the proceeds of a policy of insurance cannot, as agent, dispute the claim of his
only known principal on the ground that other persons are interested in the subject matter of the insurance.

An action of assumpsit for money had and received is maintainable by an assured part-owner of a vessel
against an insurance broker, who has received from the underwriters the full amount of sums subscribed on
a total loss, although there are several other persons interested as part-owners, and who had given
defendant notice of their interest, where plaintiff insured on the whole ship generally, by means of his
captain, who gave the order for effecting the insurance.

Where the letters between the parties showed the broker had considered himself as dealing with one of the
owners only of the ship, and as having insured for him alone: Held they were conclusive against the broker
as fixing him with an agency for his correspondent solely.

INSURANCE - MARINE INSURANCE - INSURANCE AGENTS - AGENTS OF INSURED - AUTHORITY TO

INSURE - IMPLIED AUTHORITY - PART-OWNER -- WHETHER IMPLIED AUTHORITY
An action of assumpsit, for money had and received, is maintainable by an assured part owner of a vessel,
against an insurance broker, who has received from the underwriters the full amount of the sums subscribed,
on a total loss, although there are several other persons interested as part owners, and who had given
defendants notice of their interest, where plaintiff insured on the whole ship generally, by means of his
captain, who gave the order for effecting the insurance.

The broker cannot, as an agent, dispute the claim of his only known principal, on the ground that other
persons were interested in the subject matter of the insurance. Their claims would be a question between the
assured, and the persons so claiming to be interested.

Cases referring to this case

Annotations: All CasesCourt: ALL COURTS
Sort by: Judgment Date (Latest First)
Treatment Case Name Citations Court Date CaseSearch
[1937] 2 KB 142, [1937]
Blaustein v Maltz, 1 All ER 497, 106 LJKB CaseSearch
Applied CA 27/01/1937
Mitchell & Co 471, 81 Sol Jo 177, 156 Entry
LT 316, 53 TLR 397
 Page 2

[1937] 2 KB 142, [1937]

Blaustein v Maltz, 1 All ER 497, 106 LJKB CaseSearch
Considered CA 27/01/1937
Mitchell & Co 471, 81 Sol Jo 177, 156 Entry
LT 316, 53 TLR 397
(1839) 4 My & Cr 305, 3 CaseSearch
Considered Suart v Welch Ct of Ch 29/01/1839
Jur 237, 41 ER 119 Entry
(1839) 4 My & Cr 305, 3 CaseSearch
Distinguished Suart v Welch Ct of Ch 29/01/1839
Jur 237, 41 ER 119 Entry

Cases considered by this case

Annotations: All CasesCourt: ALL COURTS
Sort by: Judgment Date (Latest First)
Treatment Case Name Citations Court Date CaseSearch
(1819) 2 B & Ald 310, CaseSearch
Followed Dixon v Hamond Ct of KB 26/01/1819
106 ER 380 Entry

Document information

Court
Court of Exchequer
Judgment date
17/05/1821