Question
Mr. Firdaus, who is the owner of FeerDaus Sdn. Bhd. (FSB), instructed his employee named Tam to order several office supplies from Sinar Sdn. Bhd.
Mr. Firdaus, who is the owner of FeerDaus Sdn. Bhd. (FSB), instructed his employee named
Tam to order several office supplies from Sinar Sdn. Bhd. (Sinar). On May 6, Tam made the
order under FSBs name but the order was made from Suria Sdn. Bhd. (Suria). When the
delivery invoice was given to Mr. Firdaus on May 10, he signed the invoice although Surias
name and logo were clearly seen on the invoice. However, when FSBs finance clerk wanted
to make payment to Suria on May 12, Mr. Firdaus prevented the payment. Mr. Firdaus gave
the excuse that he instructed Tam to make the order from Sinar and not from Suria. Therefore,
FSB refused to be liable for the payment to Suria. Based on three (3) statutory provisions and
one (1) case authority relating to the law of agency, determine whether Mr. Firdaus may do so
or otherwise.
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Step: 1
Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions
See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success
Step: 2
Step: 3
Ace Your Homework with AI
Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance
Get Started