When is an agent liable for acts performed on the principal's behalf?

An agent is liable for acts performed on the principal's behalf when those acts are conducted within the scope of their authority. This means that the agent must act in accordance with the powers granted to them by the principal, which can be defined through explicit instructions or implied by the role they have been given. When the agent operates within these boundaries, any actions taken are considered to be on behalf of the principal, thus making the principal responsible for those acts.

This principle is foundational in agency law and underscores the relationship between agents and principals, where the agent acts as a representative of the principal and is expected to act in their best interest while adhering to the regulations established by the principal.

In contrast to the other options, they imply situations where liability might be limited or unclear. For instance, if an agent were only acting under strict orders, they might still be accountable for their actions if they fall within their scope of authority, even if not explicitly directed. Similarly, an agent's lack of awareness regarding the principal's instructions does not exempt them from liability if their acts are deemed appropriate within their authorized scope. Lastly, relying solely on written permission does not encapsulate the full extent of an agent's authority, as agents can also have verbal, implied, or