— Part
Ratification.
VII.
177
intended to bind himself, unless a contrary intention clearly and a stranger, as a appears from the terms of the contract projected company subsequently incorporated is in fact, cannot by a subsequent ratification relieve him from personal liability (s). Even a secretary who has paid for his qualification, under an agreement with promoters, on the basis of a term appointment and salary, can only in such a case recover against the company on
equitable grounds for
work actually done
Sect.
3.
Conditions .
.
Ra-tifica tion.
{t).
A ratification, to be eftective, must be by the person for Principal the act was professedly done or his personal representative (zt), must have been ascerand not by a stranger. The person ratifying need not necessarily tainable. individual the time named at when the act was done, have been a but mast have been ascertainable (r)- A person entitled to the reversion of an estate may ratify the agency of one who has been professedly receiving the rents for the right owner (v). 383.
whom
384. As to the time within which ratification may take place, Time for the rule is that it must be either within a time fixed by the nature ratification, of the particular case, or within a reasonable time, after which an Thus act cannot be ratified to the prejudice of a third person. an unauthorised notice to quit can only be ratified by the landlord the payment of a debt to a within the time for giving notice {w) creditor of another cannot be ratified after the money has been returned to the unauthorised agent (x) the entry of an unauthorised
agent upon lands barred by fine and proclamation, could not be ratified after the time for entry had elapsed (y) an unauthorised stoppage transitu cannot be ratified after the transit is ended (z) and the exercise of an option must be ratified within the time for which the option was open (a). An unauthorised demand of a debt by the creditor's agent cannot, after tender by the debtor, be ratified so as to defeat the plea of tender, unless the agent had implied authority to receive the debt and give a discharge (6) An unauthorised demand of goods cannot be ratified by the owner so as to enable him to sue (c). Nor can the pledgee of a policy on a ship acquire through ratification by the owner a right to give notice of abandonment to the underwriters so
m
.
{s) Kelner v. Banker (1866), L. E. 2 C. P. 174, per Erle, C.J., at p. 183. See also Scott v. Lord Ehury (1867), L. E. 2 C. P. 255 Re Empress Engineering Co. (1880), 16 Gh. D. 125; Be Northumberland Avenue Hotel Co. (1886), 33 Ch. J). 16 Melhado v. Borto Alegre Bail. Co. (1874), L. E. 9 C. P. 503. {t) Be Dale and Blant, Ltd. (1889), 61 L. T. 206. (w) Whitehead v. Taylor (1839), 10 A. & E. 210; Foster y. Bates (IS^S), 12 ^' V
M.
^
&W.
226. Lyell V.
Kennedy
Hagedorn v. Oliverson (1814), (1889), 14 App. Cas. 437 485 see Barcell v. Henderson (1885), L. E. 16 Ir. 213, 466. {w) DoeY. Walters (1830), 10 B. & 0. 626; and see Bight v. Cathell (1804), o East, 491 Doe v. Ooldwin (1841), 2 Q. B. 143. [x) Walter v. James (1871), L. E. 6 Exch. 124; Jones v. Broadhurst (1850), 9 C. B. 173; Lucas v. Wilkinson (1856), 1 H. & N. 420. (?/) Lord Audley v. Bollard (1597), Cro. (Eliz.) 561. (z) Bird V. Brown (1850), 4Excli. 786. (a) Dibhins V. Dibbins, [1896] 2 Ch. 348. See also Holland v. King (1848), 6 C. B. 727 Metropolitan Asylums Board v. Kingham (1890), 6 T. L. E. 217. {b) Coles V. Bell (1808), 1 Camp.478 Coore y.' Callaiuay (1794), 1 Esp. 115. (c) Solomons v. Dawes (1794), 1 Esp. 83. (v)
2
M. &
S.
H.L.
—
I.
N
