Howard runs a business for selling high-ended handbags of top luxm'y brands. Marcus was employed as the merchandiser, who was responsible for the purchase of handbags from suppliers. It was agreed that all the purchases should be properly recorded and any purchase over $1 million required Howard's approval in advance. Howard recently learned that Marcus had failed to keep records of the purchases. He had also made a purchase of $1.5 million 'om one of the regular suppliers, Bag Corner, without Howard's prior approval (\"Contract 1\"). Howard was not satised with Marcus's performance and thus red him. After termination of the employment, Marcus made one more order of $1.5 million 'om Bag Comer and disappeared (\"Contract 2"}. Both Contract 1 and Contract 2 are due for payment. Howard claimed that Marcus had acted exceeding his authority and thus refused to settle the two bills of handbags with Bag Corner. Required: In the context of agency law, advise whether Howard is liable for the payment of Contract 1 and f or Contract 2 to Bag Comer. (18 marks]