77. Rederiaktiebolaget Argonaut v Hani [1917] KB 247

Undisclosed principal – parol evidence to prove identity not admitted

The facts

The charterparty was made between owners and H Company “as charterers”. A third party instituted arbitration proceedings as undisclosed principal of the agent signatory.

Findings

The court (Rowlatt J) found that the contract involved a delectus personae. Notices had to be given to the named charterer etc.

Accordingly, the terms of the agreement would be contradicted by the introduction of a third party. The parol evidence rule was called in aid to determine such evidence inadmissible.

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please login. New users may register below.

Existing Users Log In
   
New User Registration
* Please indicate that you agree to the Terms of Service
*Required field