Problem
Europea Gallery was an art dealer in London, Paris, Hong Kong and Brussels. On 1 December, it formally appointed Mark Lewis as its agent in Singapore to source for Chinese paintings by Singapore artists.
On 15 January, Singapura Stars, an art gallery in Singapore, emailed Europea Gallery and said that they have been approached by Mark. Singapura Stars wanted to verify the identity of Mark and confirm that he was indeed acting for Europea Gallery. Within a few days, Europea Gallery had issued a letter to Singapura Stars, stating "Mark Lewis is our duly authorized and appointed agent to source for all types of paintings."
On 7 February, Mark, purporting to act on behalf of Europea Gallery, signed a contract with Singapura Stars to purchase a painting by a 19th century European painter, for S$500,000.
On the same day, Mark then visited Jane and contracts to sell this 19th century European painting to her for S$750,000. He did not mention that he was an agent of Europea Gallery. Instead, he gave his personal bank account and told her that the sales proceeds could be banked directly into his personal bank account.
• Discuss two possible forms of authority which Mark possessed, as an agent of Europea Gallery. Support your analysis with the facts given above.
• Is the contract that was signed by Mark (with Singapura Stars) valid and binding on Europea
Gallery? Why?
• Did Mark breach any duties as an agent of Europea Gallery? Explain.