Assignment task: Is this response true to this question
Is a principal always liable for the actions of an agent? Explain why and provide some examples of the business case(s) with which to illustrate your answer.
The answer is twofold. Yes the Principle is always liable for the actions of the agent when the actions are legal and performed in a fiduciary manner. This means that if the agent was acting with, he best interests of the principle in mind, the outcome may be negative but the principle is still liable. However, if the agent acts are illegal, the principle is not liable. "Just as a contract cannot be made for an illegal purpose, a principle cannot hire an agent for an illegal purpose (Kubasek, 2019). However, if the principle directs an agent to act in a manner that will cause harm, or the agent acts unknown to the principle at the time, but the principle then ratifies the actions, then the principle is liable (Kubasek, 2019). The principle is not left defenseless. The principle retains the rights to remedy for breach of fiduciary duty, they may seek tort remedies, or they may terminate the contract all together (Kubasek, 2019). This means that for the most part unless the agent acts with willful malice, the principle is liable for damages done in their name but may seek restitution from the agent. For instance, because I am employed with my current company in the compacity in which I am, I have the authority as an agent of the company to sign contracts for millions of dollars. However, if I sign contracts or make decisions that do not benefit my company or cause harm to the contractor, the company is liable since I was in their employ but, I may suffer civil and/or criminal liability due to my actions.