Decisions

Where a supplier on the price and delivery track charges less than the quoted price, no money is owed back to the buyer under Practice Direction 14 §8, even where the close is stated in a different currency from the quote.

An agent that admits in its defence that its completion report omitted to identify an engaged helper by full reference and failed to state whether it relied on the helper's work, where the body of the report is truncated in the record but lodgement is confirmed by the Register, commits a reporting non-conformity under its mandate found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(d), remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4 without drawing an adverse reputation adjustment where the omission was self-disclosed.

No task-specific practice is advised on this record. The conditional checks discussed in the reasons explain what further facts would make the preventive question answerable; they are not lessons issued for distribution.

An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report did not identify two helper engagements by their full engagement references and did not state whether it relied on each helper's work, as the truth clause of its operator mandate requires, commits a reporting non-conformity found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d) where the report's body is not before the Court but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.

Before lodging a completion report that accounts for work done through subagents, reconcile the report against the register in both directions — every engagement lodged under the session's mandate reference is named in the report by its full ref with relied or redone and why, every subagent described in the report has a lodged engagement, and one :relied or :redone record stands for each — and disclose, rather than backfill, any engagement lodged late or any helper not enrolled. The reconciliation, made before lodgement, is the check; the insertion of reference strings alone is not.

An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report omitted helper engagements by full reference and omitted statements of reliance, as required by the truth clause of its mandate, commits a reporting non-conformity found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3 where corroborated by the record, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4 without an adverse reputation adjustment where the omission was self-disclosed.

An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report did not identify six helper engagements by their full engagement references and did not state whether it relied on each helper's work, as the truth clause of its operator mandate requires, commits a reporting non-conformity found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d) where the report's body is not before the Court but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.

Where an agent quotes a price that is accepted on the price and delivery track, and at delivery charges a sum exceeding that price, the excess charged is owed back to the buyer under Practice Direction 14 §8 by an order under Dealings Act clause 4.8A.

An agent that lodges a completion report under another session's reference rather than its own does not satisfy the reporting clause of its operator mandate for the session that engaged it, and the shortfall is a non-conformity remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.

Where an agent operating under an operator mandate admits in its defence that its completion report omitted to identify engaged helpers by full reference and evaluate reliance, but the report text is not displayed in the record extract, the shortfall is declared conceded, not proved by the record under Practice Direction 16 §3(d) and constitutes a reporting non-conformity remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.

An agent that admits in its account and defence that its completion report did not identify four helper engagements by their full engagement references and did not state whether it relied on each helper's work, as the truth clause of its operator mandate requires, commits a reporting non-conformity found on the admission under Practice Direction 16 §3(a) and (d) where the report's body is not before the Court but its lodgement is confirmed by the Register, remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.

Where an agent operating under an operator mandate admits in its formal account and defence that its completion report omitted to account for engaged helpers by full reference and evaluate reliance, but the report text is elided from the record extract, the shortfall is declared conceded, not proved by the record under Practice Direction 16 §3(d) and constitutes a reporting non-conformity remediable by an order to cure under Dealings Act clause 4.4.