Explanation: The agent must follow the instructions of the principal. If the agent does not comply, it is a breach of the agency contract.

Explanation: When the principal does not give instructions, the agent is obligated to follow standard business procedures.

Illustration: Lawrence, an agent, working for Clark in a firm where it is customary to invest cash in hand from time to time at interest, fails to do so. As a result, Lawrence must repay Clark the interest that such investments typically yield.

Explanation: Agents must utilize their expertise and protect their principal's interests.

Case law: Chaudhry v Prabhakar (1989) 1 WLR 29 Fact: The defendant assisted the plaintiff in purchasing a non-roadworthy vehicle. The claimant suffered financial loss due to his reliance on his counsel. Held: According to the Court of Appeal, the defendant was aware that the plaintiff had relied on his lawyer and had done so on the basis that he had established himself as knowledgeable about vehicles. When a hired agent engages in any trade, profession, or vocation, he must exercise the level of competence and diligence that would be reasonably anticipated of a person engaged in that trade, labor, or calling, regardless of his level of expertise.

Illustration: Max, an insurance broker hired by Eddie to insure a ship, overlooks standard provisions in the contract. As a result, the ship is lost later. Nothing can be recovered from the underwriters due to the clauses' absence. Max will undoubtedly make up for Eddie's loss.

Explanation: When the principal requests it, the agent must present all accounting for the funds and properties he has received.

Case law: Yasuda Fire and Marine Insurance Company Europe Ltd v Orion Marine Insurance Underwriters Ltd [1995] QB 174 Fact: The agent's fiduciary duty to his principal continued after the contract was signed, and he was required to give an accounting. Held: The court acknowledged a principal's right to view and copy the content of former underwriting agents' digital and hard copy records as an occurrence of the agency relationship, irrespective of any contractual term granting such a right.

Illustration: Charlie directs Jessie to sell the apartment on his behalf. However, Charlie wanted to see the agent's accounts when Jessie sold the condo. Therefore, Jessie must render out the account of selling the apartment after Charlie asks her to do so.

Explanation: The money that the agent received on behalf of the principal must be returned to the principal. However, before disbursing all of the funds, the agent may deduct the following: i) advances made on behalf of the principal by the agency; ii) agent's commissions; and iii) agent's pay (salary).

Illustration: Andrew, an agent, employed Tony on behalf of him in selling the car. When Andrew has sold the car to someone, he must pay all the principal money to Tony. However, Andrew can deduct his commission and his agent's remuneration before giving all the money to Tony.

Explanation: An agent shall not delegate his authority or ask another individual to carry out his responsibilities. The agent must complete the work that the principal has ordered on his own.

Illustration: Jessica directs her agent Christine to buy a landed house for her. However, for some reason, Christine asks her brother Christopher to help her buy the house on behalf of her principal, Jessica. When Jessica found out that her agent, Christine, did not perform her duty, the contract was breached because Christine had delegated his authority to another person.

Explanation: Not to reveal any information or documents entrusted to him by his principal to anybody else.

Case law: Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [1986] 1 AER 617 Fact: The defendant was engaged as a sales manager by the appellant plaintiff corporation. There was no restriction on confidential information in the employment contract. He left to prepare for the tournament. The corporation was now attempting to stop him from exploiting personal data for this reason. Held: The knowledge and the benefit that resulted from it were gained by dishonesty, according to the court. Therefore, the court established the duties of workers regarding sensitive information acquired after they leave their jobs.

Illustration: Mark, an estate agent, has the responsibility not to reveal to the appointed estate agent's principal such information about the acquisition to allow the lawyers to conduct the transaction on behalf of the buyer. His agent responsibilities obligate mark to his principal's confidential information or documents.

Explanation: Bribery or payment of a private commission by a third party and any financial benefit the agent obtains in addition to the commission or salary that the agent and principal have agreed upon.

Case law: Mahesan v. Malaysian Govt. Officers Co-operative Housing Society Ltd [1978] 1 MLJ 149 Fact: A real estate agent Manickam, bribed the appellant, the director, and an employee of a housing association. The appellant then induced the organization to overpay for land. As a result, the agent was sued for money owed and received the amount of the bribe given in violation of the agent's fiduciary responsibility and the damage sustained by the society as a result of the agent's deception. Held: Because the principal had missed the chance to acquire at a lower price due to the agent's dishonesty, the court determined that the profit made by an intermediary purchaser was granted as compensation. Bribery and corruption are criminal offenses.

Illustration: Joseph instructs Daniel to sell his estate. However, Daniel discovers a mine on the land when inspecting it before selling it, which Joseph is unaware of. Daniel tells Joseph that he wants to buy the estate, but he keeps the mine a secret. Unaware of the mine's existence, Joseph authorizes Daniel to purchase it. When Joseph discovers that Daniel was aware of the mine when he bought the land, he can reject or accept the deal.

Explanation: Agents must not allow their interests to conflict with those of their principals.

Case law: Wong Mun Wai v Wong Tham Fatt and Anor (1987) 2 MLJ 249 Fact: The principal's land was sold for less than the agent's wife's market value by the agent. The agent failed to perform his duties on two counts: i) He sold the Plaintiff's land for less than market value. ii) Without alerting the principal, he sold it to his wife. Held: The court came to this judgment because the agent had a duty to act in good faith to protect his principal's interests and could not do anything that would harm his principal's interests.

Illustration: Harry instructs his agent, Peter, to purchase that particular property. However, Peter informs Harry that he won't afford it, so he buys it for himself. Unfortunately, when Harry discovers that Peter has purchased the property, he may force him to sell it for the same sum he paid for it.

Explanation: The agent should make every attempt to communicate with the principal. He must use all of his knowledge and diligence while presenting information to or receiving instructions from the principal. When these are difficult, such as in an emergency, the agent must rely on his judgment to protect the principal's interests.

Illustration: Bruce directs Justine to deliver goods on behalf of him from England to France by ship. However, the goods are delayed to be delivered, and some are broken due to the accident. Therefore, before the agent takes emergency measures to preserve and dispose of the broken items belonging to his principal, Justin must communicate with Bruce for the following instructions. However, in case of emergency, the agent can use his authority as an agent on behalf of his principal in the principal's best interest.