For the past six years, Mr$.$ Bernardo was employed by Ms$.$ Emma as a manager to run her

butchery in Midlands. During his employment, Mr$.$ Bernardo routinely ordered fresh lamb on

behalf of Ms$.$ Emma$$s butchery from William Mackay, a sheep farmer in Mundaring. In January,

Mr$.$ Bernardo was made redundant. However, Ms$.$ Emma decided to keep the information

about his redundancy private. Despite his redundancy, Mr$.$ Bernardo placed an order with

William for five whole lambs valued at $$10,000,$ purportedly on behalf of Ms$.$ Emma$$s butchery.

Mr$.$ Bernardo later absconded with all the meat. When William Mackay sought to claim his

$$10,000$ from Ms$.$ Emma, he was informed that the meat had not been ordered by the

butchery and that Ms$.$ Emma would not pay for it$,$ as Mr$.$ Bernardo was an ex$-$manager at the

time of the order and did not have any authority to act on behalf of Ms$.$ Emma and her

butchery. Nevertheless, William Mackay insists that Mr$.$ Bernardo still had the authority to act

on behalf of Ms$.$ Emma and her butchery, and therefore Ms$.$ Emma should pay the $$10,000$

owed. Ms$.$ Emma seeks your advice on whether Mr$.$ Bernardo had the authority to bind her

to the $$10,000$ purchase transaction and whether she is liable to pay William Mackay directly.

Provide Ms$.$ Emma advice on the matter. Use IRAC method