Taylor v Smith
[1926] HCA 16(Judgment by: Rich J)
Taylor
vSmith
Judges:
Knox CJ
Isaacs J
Higgins J
Rich JStarke J
Subject References:
Principal and Agent
Authority to sell land for net sum
Right to retain excess over that sum
Authority in writing to sell for certain sum and to retain excess
Signature obtained by misrepresentation
Principal not able to read without glasses
Non est factum
Action for money had and received
Money paid away by solicitor under mistake of fact
Recovery from payee
Ratification
Judgment date: 10 June 1926
Melbourne
Judgment by:
Rich J
I confess I am not altogether satisfied with this case. It exhibits considerable conflict of testimony, but the one person-Colbert-who could have dispelled the doubt surrounding the case was not called, although ample time for doing so elapsed after Smith's evidence had been given. The question is substantially one of fact, and I agree with the judgment of the Full Court on the main point that the finding of the learned County Court Judge should not be interfered with. It was then suggested that ratification on the part of Smith had been established. After careful consideration of all the evidence and documents in the case, I cannot find that full knowledge of the facts and unequivocal adoption after such knowledge has been proved, or that the circumstances of the alleged ratification are such as to warrant the clear inference that Smith was adopting the act at all events and under all circumstances. I agree that the appeal should be dismissed.