Section 820 principle to have ties to outsiders in the affairs of the agent or agents has within the jurisdiction of the agency.
Section 821 any person to manipulate another person as their agent from another person, then allow himself to look as good representatives of their own. That person would be liable to third persons who in good faith, as if another person as their representative.
Section 822 is not an agent or any representative authority. The practice of allowing third parties to have reasonable grounds to believe that it is within the power of the gem dealer to the provisions of this Section shall apply as the case may be.
Section 823 if the agent acted without authority from either one. Or outside the edge of authority. That body shall not be binding. Unless the will to ratify it.
If the non-ratification. You will be liable to a third party that the agent alone. Unless it is proved that the party knows that they are without power. Or beyond the margins of power.
Section 824 any agent contract instead, which is domiciled in a foreign country and abroad. He said that agents are liable under the contract, but individually. Even the name of the process will not reveal it. Unless the contract is inconsistent with the liability of the agent.
Section 825 if the agent enter into contracts with third parties with bribery as selfishness, any property or other benefits to a third party's good fortune. Or pledged to make it. He called for a binding contract, which is not representative of their making. Unless you will agree with.
Supreme Court to 176/2551.
Instead of a liability under the contract alone will be represented instead of contracting. Which are domiciled in a foreign country under Section 824 of the second defendant on behalf of a defendant who did not attend the cargo and cause damage as the second defendant is not liable for. such damage.
The carrier received the goods from their origin at the time, but the damage has occurred during the product is achieved. Charge of the carrier defendants, five of which owned the boat, the freight is liable for such damage, the defendant, 6, who represents the defendant on 5 contracts of the defendant, 5 of which are foreign domiciled abroad. The six defendants must jointly liable with the defendant at 5 under Section 824.
Supreme Court in 2503/2551.
There is no official certification documents. But while the plaintiffs to examine such documents. Defendant does not dispute the objection in accordance with Section 125 must be Civil Procedure Code copy the text to match the original and listen. The witnesses were.
Text in the investigation and outstanding as of May authentication outstanding. Held that the defendant had done nothing. I doubt that the debt is implicitly based on claims of The plaintiff is the age break down, stumbling on Wed the certification date of November 3, 2540, and began a new age, from 3 November 2540 on the day after the filing date is September 3, 2541 the plaintiff was not the case. terminate the second year, according to Section 193 / 14 (1), 193/15 and 193/34 (1).
The defendant's consent to act on their own heads Wed guarantee the accuracy of the book examine the plaintiff's debt. The defendant is liable to the plaintiff by the defendant as a representative of the May Section 821.
Supreme Court to 10711/2550.
The company has a corporate defendant, the defendant, the second type is authorized to act on behalf. According to the plaintiff filed a dispute under the contract to allow a defendant to the plaintiff's copyrighted songs without due compensation. The plaintiff sued the defendant and that the agreement is a civil case in court. Thonburi, until a compromise agreement. Plaintiffs argue on appeal that the fact that the two defendants are not accused the two parties who signed a pay check to pay compensation to the plaintiff accordingly. Only the second defendant is authorized to act on behalf of a defendant in behalf of a defendant under Section 1167 of Article 820 of the second defendant did not appear to be outside the jurisdiction of the agency. And the second defendant did not appear to have the license of the plaintiff as the defendant's liability to the plaintiff's second and must not. The plaintiff sued the defendant has no power 2 and the second defendant has no counterclaim. With no right to appeal a court ruling intellectual property and international trade. The defendant's counterclaim to the enforcement of the two as well.
Supreme Court in 4306/2550.
That a defendant domiciled in Bangkok. The plaintiff sued the defendant No. 1 and No. 2 common liability arising from an agent. If the information is relevant to the case. The plaintiff sued the defendant, a defendant domiciled in Bangkok and 2, which is domiciled in the District Court and the Court of First Instance by P.wi.p. Section 5.
The fact that two representatives of the defendants a duty to persuade the guests to do the coverage purchased, the defendant No. 1 and is responsible for insurance of the defendant that a well would be the guests, including the plaintiff to understand and believe that the defendant 2, say, or do they act within the scope of authority of the two defendants who are representing. Despite the fact that the second defendant to pay premiums in advance will be done outside the jurisdiction of the defendant is represented as a character, it is liable to the plaintiff, a third party who in good faith and in accordance with Section 822. Section 820 without regard to whether the defendant is given an advance payment of such premium or not.
The defendant does not have an organization that represents the premium in advance. And check made payable to the plaintiff to pay the premium does not comply with the instructions. Specified in the receipt of money temporarily, but a defendant is ordered to pay in advance or not. It is a matter between the defendant and a defendant with a second defendant did not raise this issue with a disclaimer.
Agreement that the plaintiff made against two defendants did not dispute that it is completed. But also that the plaintiff does not prosecute the defendant on the second when the accused 2, agreement on other full agreement is not a compromise agreement and the debt was suspended, defendant No. 1 has been committed. will be liable to the plaintiff.
Supreme Court in 5256/2550.
Although the accused in criminal cases bail is not in the Article 35 that a defendant intended to engage in the business of debt, liability or guarantee for the performance of the contract. Although the Supreme Court would agree that a defendant has entered into insurance contracts, insurance, SOI, which ratified the agreement, then the insurance. Such insurance contracts shall be binding only on the first defendant, the defendant, 2 and 3, is not liable under Section 823.
Supreme Court in 1657/2550.
Section 728 stipulates that "when the mortgage is. Mortgagee shall mail notice to the debtor before ... "is not provided. Notice shall be in writing mortgages. Therefore, the plaintiff's attorney to the. Written notice of the mortgage, the defendant does not fall within the provisions of Section 798 paragraph one, given the agent must be in writing on that. A notice of the mortgage on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendant received the letter. I did not notice. Payment to the plaintiff. The plaintiff's lawsuit. The plaintiff accepts that the notice provisions of the new mortgage. The notice of the plaintiff. Held that the plaintiff, which it ratified in accordance with Section 823 shall constitute notice to the plaintiff by the then mortgage.
Supreme Court in 2312/2550.
The defendant made the request to open a current account alone. Without an overdraft or loan agreement secured by any. Given the plaintiff. The application for an overdraft after only 3 days to allow the defendant to the plaintiff bank check withdrawal from your bank account than the plaintiff had not shown that he had known the defendant as well as special guests. Show that the defendant is bound to help. Managers, Samrong Branch plaintiff bank. People signed up to the defendant bank account. Match with the defendant's defense that the defendant entered into an agreement to allow home construction. After opening the check payable to the defendant for a sum not exceeding the amount of wages received. Construction house for Christmas. The defendant was stopped for a check withdrawal. The beach was incredible. I take into account the defendant's obligations to pay to listen to the fact that home construction. The defendant is to allow the current account. Managers, Samrong bank branch to pay the plaintiff to hire a home contractor payments. Debt to the defendant by bringing money into the account. And the defendant to withdraw a check paid by the construction contractor. Defendants do not intend to do the overdraft from the plaintiff, so if the beach. Do not take into account the defendant to repay the help. Default the defendant shall be Check the plaintiff is under no obligation to pay cash. Money to help the defendant. But somehow, but that helps. I paid the check to the defendant that the defendant is not in good faith. The fee for the channel. The construction account to pay for debt service. Defendants do not intend to overdraft from the plaintiff to help. A plaintiff bank branch managers, Samrong. The defendant would not be able to take out cash as it appears in this case. If the account does not exist. I refuse to pay the bank the check is not the claim or defense. Suspension of the construction contract to the beach. Responder or litigate to pay contractors from the slot. As soon as the evidence is still required to carry the channel. Regarded as a position as a bank manager. Samrong Branch plaintiff by defendant as a principal is not liable for the actions of their agents. The defendant received the money from the bank plaintiff, by mistake, that is the period in which the defendant is entitled to the defendant is not intended to be a legal relationship to legal overdraft with the plaintiff, the plaintiff has sued the money from the defendant as a debtor. overdraft is not.
Supreme Court in 7673/2550.
Taxi, car accident, the second defendant's name and seal of the defendant, the two stuck to the door on both sides. People who had seen the car, the defendant must understand that this is the second of two defendants accused of allowing a car to run on behalf of the passengers had been revealed by the two defendants with two benefits. The defendant No. 2 heads to the defendant that a representative of the defendant No. 2 in the loading of passengers accused the two are liable to third persons who in good faith, as if the defendant is an agent of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 821 and requires. jointly liable for the infringement of a defendant to the plaintiff under Section 427 and Section 425 defendants 3 and 4 is a partnership, unlimited liability of the defendant, the two must share liability.
The result of the violation of a defendant to the plaintiff was damaged by a disability. Disability was considered to be other damage, other than money. The plaintiff is entitled to indemnification by this section. The court shall have the authority to judge appropriate to the circumstances and the seriousness of the violation. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 438.
Supreme Court in 5140/2550.
Sat is the agent of the defendant and the defendant's actions. In a book that would please you to reduce the price down to what is appropriate. The waiver of the monthly payment for the equipment. It is any action. The doubt of the defendant to demonstrate that it is implicitly accepted by the debt-claim, thus making life a smooth stop.
Supreme Court in 7970/2549.
It represents the excess of power. The practice of allowing a third party has reasonable cause to believe that. It is within the jurisdiction of this agency. That the defendant would be liable as a third party who in good faith in accordance with Section 822 and Section 821.
Supreme Court in 4998/2549.
Withdraw legal action to redeem the mortgage. Mortgage and sale of land back to the plaintiff as the owner of the property. Follow-up and retake their property under Section 1336 has no time limit.
The four defendants to purchase the disputed land, deposits amounting to 2.5 million by us already. Power of Attorney signed by the plaintiff only has a message that there is no authority to do so. And what site to complete the Power of Attorney. The plaintiff did not agree with. It is caused by gross negligence of the defendant to believe that the fourth fraud of the defendant that a plaintiff is not caused by the defendant at a library or allow the defendant to turn himself into an agent of the plaintiff. Plaintiff, the defendant was not liable under Section 4, 821, 822 so that a defendant has no right to the land of the plaintiff against the defendant to register the sale of the four transactions between plaintiff and defendant that the sale did not like, and 4. not be binding on the plaintiff. The plaintiff shall be entitled to recoup their property from the plaintiff is not entitled to take legal action to revoke the sale between the plaintiff and defendant 4.
Supreme Court in 4594/2549.
Both defendants had previously ordered the plaintiff's advertising several times by the two defendants in order to sign the ad.The messages advertised, it is in the business and interests of the defendant that a unilateral act is an indication that the defendant is a turn accused the two representatives of their employer plaintiff advertised the defendant first must bind liable to pay a stipend to plaintiff
Supreme Court in 7739/2549.
Despite the presence of branded companies in the plaintiff's attorney will not seal the same. The registered brand. It has the look and feel. And the plaintiff's name as registered. Can be understood as the hallmark of the plaintiff on the second one in 5 people acting on behalf of the plaintiff, according to the regulations correctly. Power of Attorney shall be bound to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has sued.
Supreme Court in 7728 - 7729/2548.
The debtor is allowed to operate a bus company to transport not Jira soot bus rental cars, fire trucks, oil, and marked with the name of the debtor in the car. Water tankers to deliver to customers throughout the Kingdom. Such companies can be considered as representative of the debtor in transport fuel. When a fuel truck driver, an employee of the company has violated. Creditors, both in formal employment. The debtor shall be liable for the consequences of violating the employee's agency has acted in accordance with Section 425, 427, 820.
Supreme Court at 803 - 804/2548.
Agent that occurs by operation of law does not require proof that the agents are explicitly represented as a simple case.
The first defendant and the defendant agreed to give 2 and 3, the land sold to third parties, including land disputes with Held that the defendant is a dummy defendants 2 and 3, from representing his or already know, allow the defendant to the 2 and 3, turn itself into an agent of the defendant first must bind to the plaintiff as a person. external parties defendant, 2 and 3, as if the defendant's actions, 2 and 3, as if the defendant's actions, 2 and 3 as their representative.
Supreme Court in 5099/2548.
The plaintiff sued the helicopter is described by plaintiff's attorney with a copy of the lawsuit, which holds power of attorney is attached. As part of the indictment. It has a power of attorney and co-signed by the province to act on behalf of the plaintiff. Defendant to a lawsuit filed while the plaintiff and E. It does not have a bank vice president was secretary of the plaintiff's attorney then. We assume that both the defendant and to act on behalf of the plaintiff. The power of attorney to sign it. And while the plaintiff had not filed a written revocation of such authorization. Such authorization is still valid and enforceable by law.both have been lost. Or incomplete in any way. The plaintiff need not present evidence that the prosecution traced the two men still in power. Acting on behalf of the plaintiff.
Supreme Court in 2839/2548.
I agree with the humanitarian assistance of the defendant that the defendant agreed to a message m with m an automobile accident, this time to make a repair to a usable condition as usual. The compensation and assistance to the injured at the end I have a message. The parties do not have any claim or claims for damages arising out of this one. Both civil and criminal. Both sides by m, and the defendant had signed a memorandum of it. A compromise agreement under Section 850 and the circumstances of the accident, the plaintiff and the defendant's agreement with the University to the repairs and damages and the plaintiff agree to such records. We hear that the plaintiff had to dummy meters representing the plaintiffs in making such a compromise agreement. The plaintiff has the right to claim in violation of the defendant. I have the right to claim under the compromise agreement under Section 852.
Supreme Court to 12523/2547.
The plaintiff's attorney to the attorney. The prosecution said. As the prosecution and civil proceedings against the defendant. As well as your attorney to withdraw the lawsuit. Compromise. Exercise or waive the right to appeal or petition. The attorney representing plaintiffs in litigation against a defendant in a lawsuit about. Necessary. The attorney advised the court, the plaintiff agreed to sell land to the defendant. It is an act beyond the powers of the plaintiff. Shall not be binding itself. However, after the defendant's attorney had agreed to buy the land. The plaintiff, the plaintiff in the land of the living from the land end. Terms of attorney and the defendant agreed. Held that the plaintiff has ratified the transactions that are authorized to act apart. The power under Section 823 plaintiffs to be bound by such acts.
Supreme Court in 1981/2547.
The second defendant has not assigned or appointed to represent a defendant disputes the plaintiff's vehicle sales by clear expression. But the second act of the defendant purchased the vehicle from the manufacturer and the second defendant sold the car to a T. It also agreed to inspect the vehicle according to the plaintiff. The second defendant did not protest, or one that is not built. Show that the defendant 1 and T. The company is set and the number 2 is the same channel. And we believe that the defendant Sat 1 & T. The company is affiliated. Under the facts of the case held that the defendant intended to 2 T. Such a distribution vehicle without the need to determine how the distribution. This is dummy dummy T. and T. is the name of defendant No. 1 in sales of vehicles dispute to the plaintiff. Under the circumstances of the case believe that the defendant knew that the two defendants to a T. The distribution of vehicles, the second defendant to the plaintiff which the plaintiff has a duty to be liable to a third party who in good faith.
Supreme Court in 4046/2546.
According to witness accounts, rank first in the name of the witness. Plaintiff's attorney stated that his claim does not specify the address of a witness by witness. Indicate the status of the plaintiff testified that the attorney of the plaintiff. However, the plaintiff sued as assignee of the data. The grade is based on the appointee. The plaintiff's attorney, according to the data. Power range. The status of the appointee and the appointee is different so I do not think the plaintiff's witnesses had testified for the plaintiff, and I refer to it. Accused of ordering and receiving goods to and from the plaintiff. Attest that the defendant did not refute that attest to that. The directors of the defendant sign the order to show that the defendant did not buy one. I've taken from the plaintiff when the plaintiff testified the defendant did not object. The plaintiff did not appear to wish to take advantage of the case. The defendants are not disadvantaged and do not damage the interest of justice, so I listened to the testimony of the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 87 (2).
The letter stated that Directors of four people, including the defendant. With the signing of two people together and seal of the defendant and the defendant, but that binding. Signed an order using a purchase order form of the defendant. When the plaintiff to deliver the goods. Employees of the defendants received the products, and later on. As the President of the defendant a written waiver of repayment. The form of the other defendants. Would then allow the defendant to show that. Turn itself off, representing a purchase from the plaintiff. The defendant is liable to the plaintiff.
Supreme Court in 4684/2528.
The defendant, who is the manager of the plaintiff's fraud of the plaintiff's customers that Plaintiff's price increases. I believe that customers buy. The sales amount exceeded the amount of customers to deliver to the defendant because the defendant was not a trick that has been put about by the defendant as an agent under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 810 of the money is being deceptive. The use of the plaintiff's not. The plaintiff was not injured. When the owner of money who is the victim does not complain. The plaintiff has no power to sue. (Meeting No. 12/2528).
Supreme Court in 1063/2527.
The three defendants accused in two bank manager, a branch of the fourth defendant signed a check for the defendants 3 and 4, the agents enter into contracts with third parties. But in the contract, the defendant No. 2 has been done to put the interests of the plaintiff to look personally to the defendant, the second is that the plaintiff accept payment by check and return the evidence of defendant's second loan from the plaintiff to the defendant. 2, which is the fact that two out of the debtor, the plaintiff by the defendant, 3 and 4, did not consent to the actions of the defendant, the second with the contract is not binding on the defendants 3 and 4, by implication. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 825.
Section 821 any person to manipulate another person as their agent from another person, then allow himself to look as good representatives of their own. That person would be liable to third persons who in good faith, as if another person as their representative.
Section 822 is not an agent or any representative authority. The practice of allowing third parties to have reasonable grounds to believe that it is within the power of the gem dealer to the provisions of this Section shall apply as the case may be.
Section 823 if the agent acted without authority from either one. Or outside the edge of authority. That body shall not be binding. Unless the will to ratify it.
If the non-ratification. You will be liable to a third party that the agent alone. Unless it is proved that the party knows that they are without power. Or beyond the margins of power.
Section 824 any agent contract instead, which is domiciled in a foreign country and abroad. He said that agents are liable under the contract, but individually. Even the name of the process will not reveal it. Unless the contract is inconsistent with the liability of the agent.
Section 825 if the agent enter into contracts with third parties with bribery as selfishness, any property or other benefits to a third party's good fortune. Or pledged to make it. He called for a binding contract, which is not representative of their making. Unless you will agree with.
Supreme Court to 176/2551.
Instead of a liability under the contract alone will be represented instead of contracting. Which are domiciled in a foreign country under Section 824 of the second defendant on behalf of a defendant who did not attend the cargo and cause damage as the second defendant is not liable for. such damage.
The carrier received the goods from their origin at the time, but the damage has occurred during the product is achieved. Charge of the carrier defendants, five of which owned the boat, the freight is liable for such damage, the defendant, 6, who represents the defendant on 5 contracts of the defendant, 5 of which are foreign domiciled abroad. The six defendants must jointly liable with the defendant at 5 under Section 824.
Supreme Court in 2503/2551.
There is no official certification documents. But while the plaintiffs to examine such documents. Defendant does not dispute the objection in accordance with Section 125 must be Civil Procedure Code copy the text to match the original and listen. The witnesses were.
Text in the investigation and outstanding as of May authentication outstanding. Held that the defendant had done nothing. I doubt that the debt is implicitly based on claims of The plaintiff is the age break down, stumbling on Wed the certification date of November 3, 2540, and began a new age, from 3 November 2540 on the day after the filing date is September 3, 2541 the plaintiff was not the case. terminate the second year, according to Section 193 / 14 (1), 193/15 and 193/34 (1).
The defendant's consent to act on their own heads Wed guarantee the accuracy of the book examine the plaintiff's debt. The defendant is liable to the plaintiff by the defendant as a representative of the May Section 821.
Supreme Court to 10711/2550.
The company has a corporate defendant, the defendant, the second type is authorized to act on behalf. According to the plaintiff filed a dispute under the contract to allow a defendant to the plaintiff's copyrighted songs without due compensation. The plaintiff sued the defendant and that the agreement is a civil case in court. Thonburi, until a compromise agreement. Plaintiffs argue on appeal that the fact that the two defendants are not accused the two parties who signed a pay check to pay compensation to the plaintiff accordingly. Only the second defendant is authorized to act on behalf of a defendant in behalf of a defendant under Section 1167 of Article 820 of the second defendant did not appear to be outside the jurisdiction of the agency. And the second defendant did not appear to have the license of the plaintiff as the defendant's liability to the plaintiff's second and must not. The plaintiff sued the defendant has no power 2 and the second defendant has no counterclaim. With no right to appeal a court ruling intellectual property and international trade. The defendant's counterclaim to the enforcement of the two as well.
Supreme Court in 4306/2550.
That a defendant domiciled in Bangkok. The plaintiff sued the defendant No. 1 and No. 2 common liability arising from an agent. If the information is relevant to the case. The plaintiff sued the defendant, a defendant domiciled in Bangkok and 2, which is domiciled in the District Court and the Court of First Instance by P.wi.p. Section 5.
The fact that two representatives of the defendants a duty to persuade the guests to do the coverage purchased, the defendant No. 1 and is responsible for insurance of the defendant that a well would be the guests, including the plaintiff to understand and believe that the defendant 2, say, or do they act within the scope of authority of the two defendants who are representing. Despite the fact that the second defendant to pay premiums in advance will be done outside the jurisdiction of the defendant is represented as a character, it is liable to the plaintiff, a third party who in good faith and in accordance with Section 822. Section 820 without regard to whether the defendant is given an advance payment of such premium or not.
The defendant does not have an organization that represents the premium in advance. And check made payable to the plaintiff to pay the premium does not comply with the instructions. Specified in the receipt of money temporarily, but a defendant is ordered to pay in advance or not. It is a matter between the defendant and a defendant with a second defendant did not raise this issue with a disclaimer.
Agreement that the plaintiff made against two defendants did not dispute that it is completed. But also that the plaintiff does not prosecute the defendant on the second when the accused 2, agreement on other full agreement is not a compromise agreement and the debt was suspended, defendant No. 1 has been committed. will be liable to the plaintiff.
Supreme Court in 5256/2550.
Although the accused in criminal cases bail is not in the Article 35 that a defendant intended to engage in the business of debt, liability or guarantee for the performance of the contract. Although the Supreme Court would agree that a defendant has entered into insurance contracts, insurance, SOI, which ratified the agreement, then the insurance. Such insurance contracts shall be binding only on the first defendant, the defendant, 2 and 3, is not liable under Section 823.
Supreme Court in 1657/2550.
Section 728 stipulates that "when the mortgage is. Mortgagee shall mail notice to the debtor before ... "is not provided. Notice shall be in writing mortgages. Therefore, the plaintiff's attorney to the. Written notice of the mortgage, the defendant does not fall within the provisions of Section 798 paragraph one, given the agent must be in writing on that. A notice of the mortgage on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendant received the letter. I did not notice. Payment to the plaintiff. The plaintiff's lawsuit. The plaintiff accepts that the notice provisions of the new mortgage. The notice of the plaintiff. Held that the plaintiff, which it ratified in accordance with Section 823 shall constitute notice to the plaintiff by the then mortgage.
Supreme Court in 2312/2550.
The defendant made the request to open a current account alone. Without an overdraft or loan agreement secured by any. Given the plaintiff. The application for an overdraft after only 3 days to allow the defendant to the plaintiff bank check withdrawal from your bank account than the plaintiff had not shown that he had known the defendant as well as special guests. Show that the defendant is bound to help. Managers, Samrong Branch plaintiff bank. People signed up to the defendant bank account. Match with the defendant's defense that the defendant entered into an agreement to allow home construction. After opening the check payable to the defendant for a sum not exceeding the amount of wages received. Construction house for Christmas. The defendant was stopped for a check withdrawal. The beach was incredible. I take into account the defendant's obligations to pay to listen to the fact that home construction. The defendant is to allow the current account. Managers, Samrong bank branch to pay the plaintiff to hire a home contractor payments. Debt to the defendant by bringing money into the account. And the defendant to withdraw a check paid by the construction contractor. Defendants do not intend to do the overdraft from the plaintiff, so if the beach. Do not take into account the defendant to repay the help. Default the defendant shall be Check the plaintiff is under no obligation to pay cash. Money to help the defendant. But somehow, but that helps. I paid the check to the defendant that the defendant is not in good faith. The fee for the channel. The construction account to pay for debt service. Defendants do not intend to overdraft from the plaintiff to help. A plaintiff bank branch managers, Samrong. The defendant would not be able to take out cash as it appears in this case. If the account does not exist. I refuse to pay the bank the check is not the claim or defense. Suspension of the construction contract to the beach. Responder or litigate to pay contractors from the slot. As soon as the evidence is still required to carry the channel. Regarded as a position as a bank manager. Samrong Branch plaintiff by defendant as a principal is not liable for the actions of their agents. The defendant received the money from the bank plaintiff, by mistake, that is the period in which the defendant is entitled to the defendant is not intended to be a legal relationship to legal overdraft with the plaintiff, the plaintiff has sued the money from the defendant as a debtor. overdraft is not.
Supreme Court in 7673/2550.
Taxi, car accident, the second defendant's name and seal of the defendant, the two stuck to the door on both sides. People who had seen the car, the defendant must understand that this is the second of two defendants accused of allowing a car to run on behalf of the passengers had been revealed by the two defendants with two benefits. The defendant No. 2 heads to the defendant that a representative of the defendant No. 2 in the loading of passengers accused the two are liable to third persons who in good faith, as if the defendant is an agent of the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 821 and requires. jointly liable for the infringement of a defendant to the plaintiff under Section 427 and Section 425 defendants 3 and 4 is a partnership, unlimited liability of the defendant, the two must share liability.
The result of the violation of a defendant to the plaintiff was damaged by a disability. Disability was considered to be other damage, other than money. The plaintiff is entitled to indemnification by this section. The court shall have the authority to judge appropriate to the circumstances and the seriousness of the violation. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 438.
Supreme Court in 5140/2550.
Sat is the agent of the defendant and the defendant's actions. In a book that would please you to reduce the price down to what is appropriate. The waiver of the monthly payment for the equipment. It is any action. The doubt of the defendant to demonstrate that it is implicitly accepted by the debt-claim, thus making life a smooth stop.
Supreme Court in 7970/2549.
It represents the excess of power. The practice of allowing a third party has reasonable cause to believe that. It is within the jurisdiction of this agency. That the defendant would be liable as a third party who in good faith in accordance with Section 822 and Section 821.
Supreme Court in 4998/2549.
Withdraw legal action to redeem the mortgage. Mortgage and sale of land back to the plaintiff as the owner of the property. Follow-up and retake their property under Section 1336 has no time limit.
The four defendants to purchase the disputed land, deposits amounting to 2.5 million by us already. Power of Attorney signed by the plaintiff only has a message that there is no authority to do so. And what site to complete the Power of Attorney. The plaintiff did not agree with. It is caused by gross negligence of the defendant to believe that the fourth fraud of the defendant that a plaintiff is not caused by the defendant at a library or allow the defendant to turn himself into an agent of the plaintiff. Plaintiff, the defendant was not liable under Section 4, 821, 822 so that a defendant has no right to the land of the plaintiff against the defendant to register the sale of the four transactions between plaintiff and defendant that the sale did not like, and 4. not be binding on the plaintiff. The plaintiff shall be entitled to recoup their property from the plaintiff is not entitled to take legal action to revoke the sale between the plaintiff and defendant 4.
Supreme Court in 4594/2549.
Both defendants had previously ordered the plaintiff's advertising several times by the two defendants in order to sign the ad.The messages advertised, it is in the business and interests of the defendant that a unilateral act is an indication that the defendant is a turn accused the two representatives of their employer plaintiff advertised the defendant first must bind liable to pay a stipend to plaintiff
Supreme Court in 7739/2549.
Despite the presence of branded companies in the plaintiff's attorney will not seal the same. The registered brand. It has the look and feel. And the plaintiff's name as registered. Can be understood as the hallmark of the plaintiff on the second one in 5 people acting on behalf of the plaintiff, according to the regulations correctly. Power of Attorney shall be bound to the plaintiff. The plaintiff has sued.
Supreme Court in 7728 - 7729/2548.
The debtor is allowed to operate a bus company to transport not Jira soot bus rental cars, fire trucks, oil, and marked with the name of the debtor in the car. Water tankers to deliver to customers throughout the Kingdom. Such companies can be considered as representative of the debtor in transport fuel. When a fuel truck driver, an employee of the company has violated. Creditors, both in formal employment. The debtor shall be liable for the consequences of violating the employee's agency has acted in accordance with Section 425, 427, 820.
Supreme Court at 803 - 804/2548.
Agent that occurs by operation of law does not require proof that the agents are explicitly represented as a simple case.
The first defendant and the defendant agreed to give 2 and 3, the land sold to third parties, including land disputes with Held that the defendant is a dummy defendants 2 and 3, from representing his or already know, allow the defendant to the 2 and 3, turn itself into an agent of the defendant first must bind to the plaintiff as a person. external parties defendant, 2 and 3, as if the defendant's actions, 2 and 3, as if the defendant's actions, 2 and 3 as their representative.
Supreme Court in 5099/2548.
The plaintiff sued the helicopter is described by plaintiff's attorney with a copy of the lawsuit, which holds power of attorney is attached. As part of the indictment. It has a power of attorney and co-signed by the province to act on behalf of the plaintiff. Defendant to a lawsuit filed while the plaintiff and E. It does not have a bank vice president was secretary of the plaintiff's attorney then. We assume that both the defendant and to act on behalf of the plaintiff. The power of attorney to sign it. And while the plaintiff had not filed a written revocation of such authorization. Such authorization is still valid and enforceable by law.both have been lost. Or incomplete in any way. The plaintiff need not present evidence that the prosecution traced the two men still in power. Acting on behalf of the plaintiff.
Supreme Court in 2839/2548.
I agree with the humanitarian assistance of the defendant that the defendant agreed to a message m with m an automobile accident, this time to make a repair to a usable condition as usual. The compensation and assistance to the injured at the end I have a message. The parties do not have any claim or claims for damages arising out of this one. Both civil and criminal. Both sides by m, and the defendant had signed a memorandum of it. A compromise agreement under Section 850 and the circumstances of the accident, the plaintiff and the defendant's agreement with the University to the repairs and damages and the plaintiff agree to such records. We hear that the plaintiff had to dummy meters representing the plaintiffs in making such a compromise agreement. The plaintiff has the right to claim in violation of the defendant. I have the right to claim under the compromise agreement under Section 852.
Supreme Court to 12523/2547.
The plaintiff's attorney to the attorney. The prosecution said. As the prosecution and civil proceedings against the defendant. As well as your attorney to withdraw the lawsuit. Compromise. Exercise or waive the right to appeal or petition. The attorney representing plaintiffs in litigation against a defendant in a lawsuit about. Necessary. The attorney advised the court, the plaintiff agreed to sell land to the defendant. It is an act beyond the powers of the plaintiff. Shall not be binding itself. However, after the defendant's attorney had agreed to buy the land. The plaintiff, the plaintiff in the land of the living from the land end. Terms of attorney and the defendant agreed. Held that the plaintiff has ratified the transactions that are authorized to act apart. The power under Section 823 plaintiffs to be bound by such acts.
Supreme Court in 1981/2547.
The second defendant has not assigned or appointed to represent a defendant disputes the plaintiff's vehicle sales by clear expression. But the second act of the defendant purchased the vehicle from the manufacturer and the second defendant sold the car to a T. It also agreed to inspect the vehicle according to the plaintiff. The second defendant did not protest, or one that is not built. Show that the defendant 1 and T. The company is set and the number 2 is the same channel. And we believe that the defendant Sat 1 & T. The company is affiliated. Under the facts of the case held that the defendant intended to 2 T. Such a distribution vehicle without the need to determine how the distribution. This is dummy dummy T. and T. is the name of defendant No. 1 in sales of vehicles dispute to the plaintiff. Under the circumstances of the case believe that the defendant knew that the two defendants to a T. The distribution of vehicles, the second defendant to the plaintiff which the plaintiff has a duty to be liable to a third party who in good faith.
Supreme Court in 4046/2546.
According to witness accounts, rank first in the name of the witness. Plaintiff's attorney stated that his claim does not specify the address of a witness by witness. Indicate the status of the plaintiff testified that the attorney of the plaintiff. However, the plaintiff sued as assignee of the data. The grade is based on the appointee. The plaintiff's attorney, according to the data. Power range. The status of the appointee and the appointee is different so I do not think the plaintiff's witnesses had testified for the plaintiff, and I refer to it. Accused of ordering and receiving goods to and from the plaintiff. Attest that the defendant did not refute that attest to that. The directors of the defendant sign the order to show that the defendant did not buy one. I've taken from the plaintiff when the plaintiff testified the defendant did not object. The plaintiff did not appear to wish to take advantage of the case. The defendants are not disadvantaged and do not damage the interest of justice, so I listened to the testimony of the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 87 (2).
The letter stated that Directors of four people, including the defendant. With the signing of two people together and seal of the defendant and the defendant, but that binding. Signed an order using a purchase order form of the defendant. When the plaintiff to deliver the goods. Employees of the defendants received the products, and later on. As the President of the defendant a written waiver of repayment. The form of the other defendants. Would then allow the defendant to show that. Turn itself off, representing a purchase from the plaintiff. The defendant is liable to the plaintiff.
Supreme Court in 4684/2528.
The defendant, who is the manager of the plaintiff's fraud of the plaintiff's customers that Plaintiff's price increases. I believe that customers buy. The sales amount exceeded the amount of customers to deliver to the defendant because the defendant was not a trick that has been put about by the defendant as an agent under the Civil and Commercial Code, Section 810 of the money is being deceptive. The use of the plaintiff's not. The plaintiff was not injured. When the owner of money who is the victim does not complain. The plaintiff has no power to sue. (Meeting No. 12/2528).
Supreme Court in 1063/2527.
The three defendants accused in two bank manager, a branch of the fourth defendant signed a check for the defendants 3 and 4, the agents enter into contracts with third parties. But in the contract, the defendant No. 2 has been done to put the interests of the plaintiff to look personally to the defendant, the second is that the plaintiff accept payment by check and return the evidence of defendant's second loan from the plaintiff to the defendant. 2, which is the fact that two out of the debtor, the plaintiff by the defendant, 3 and 4, did not consent to the actions of the defendant, the second with the contract is not binding on the defendants 3 and 4, by implication. Civil and Commercial Code, Section 825.
