| 英文摘要 |
In the case of termination of authorised authority, since the principal once granted authority to the agent, it can be said that the principal created the appearance of authority and he did not take appropriate measures to eliminate that appearance. If the third party has reasonable reliance, there exists apparent agency. To protect transaction security, when judging reasonable reliance, one should not impose general duty of investigation and examination. If the principal announced that he had granted authority to another by special notice or public notice, or letter of authorisation was delivered and presented, the third party should be protected, so apparent agency exists in principle, unless there is presumed knowledge. When presumed knowledge does not exist, according to the concrete situation, taking significance as standard, one can also affirm that the third party should know the perishing of authority, thus the legal transaction does not bind the principal. |
