(I) Above, pp, 308, 334.

(m) See above, pp. 308, 334 - 336, and notes (t), (b).

(n) Above, p. 336 and n. (t).

(o) New Sombrero Phosphate Co. v. Erlanger, 5 Ch. D. 73, 125; affirmed, 3 App. Cas. 1218. It appears that the purchaser is not liable to account on the footing of wilful default, except a special case be made out against him; see above, p. 753.

(p) Above, pp. 745, 746.

(q) Erlanger v. New Sombrero Phosphate Co., 3 App. Cas. 1218, 1278; Lagunas Nitrate Co. v. Lagunas Syndicate, 1899, 2 Ch. 392, 416, 423, 433, 456, 463, 464.

(r) Re Cape Breton Co., 29 Ch. D. 795.

Where the act was done in ignorance of the facts which entitled him to rescind.

Where the act was done with knowledge of such facts.

Actual fraud of the agent.

(r) See note (q), above.

(s) See Be Ambrose, etc. Co., 14 Ch. D. 390, 394; Re Cape Breton Co., 29 Ch. D. 795, 811; S. C, nom. Bentinek v. Fenn, 12 App. Cas. 652, 659; cf. above, p. 897.

(0 Above, p. 896; C. A., Lydney, etc. Co. v. Bird, 33 Ch. D. 85, 94; Collins, L. J., Be Olympia, Ld., 1898, 2 Ch. 153, 179.

(u) Great Luxembourg By. Co. v. Magnay, 25 Beav. 586; Kimber v. Barber, L. R. 8 Ch. 56, 57, n., 59; Cairns, C, Erlanger v. New

Sombrero Phosphate Co., 3 App. Cas. 1218, 1235, 1238, 1242; Be Cape Breton Co., 26 Ch. D. 221; 29 Ch. D. 795; affirmed on other grounds, nom. Bentinck v. Fenn, 12 App. Cas. 652; Ladywell Mining Co. v. Brookes, 35 Ch. D. 400; Lagunas Nitrate Co. v. Lagunas Syndicate, 1899, 2 Ch. 392; Be Lady Forrest Mine, 1901, 1 Ch. 582; Burland v. Earle, 1902, A. C. 83, 87, 98, 99; but see Be Olympia, Ld., 1898, 2 Ch. 153, 170, 178, 179.

Agent for purchase selling his own land bought since the agency commenced.

Where on a sale of land the purchaser has notice from the abstract or otherwise (a), that the vendor derives title through a sale or other conveyance made in favour of one occupying a position, from which undue influence would be implied (b), or made of a cestui-que-trust's interest in the trust property to his trustee (c), the purchaser's advisers should point out the consequent objection (d) to the title and require the vendor to furnish evidence that the circumstances and terms of the apparently objectionable transaction were such as to render it perfectly valid (e). If the vendor can produce such evidence, the purchaser will have to accept the title on that point; for when such an objection has been so removed, the Court does not consider the title too doubtful to be forced upon an unwillingpurchaser, notwithstanding that the evidence offered do not include any testimony given by or conclusively binding the persons, who would be entitled to set the transaction aside (f). If, however, a vendor's title be derived through a sale made by a person, exercising an authority to sell, in his own favour, the nature of the objection to the title is entirely different; as in equity the exercise of the authority is void, and the equitable estate auithorised to be conveyed has never passed away from the persons by whom or on whose behalf the authority was conferred (g). In this case, therefore, the purchaser cannot be obliged to accept the title, without the concurrence of those persons or their successors in estate, all being sui juris (h).

Title derived through a conveyance open to the objection of undue influence, or made by cestui-que-trust to trustee.

[x) Above, pp. 723, 729, 739, 740.

(y) Charter v. Trevelyan, 11 Cl. & Fin. 714, 738, 739; Lewis v. Hillman, 3 H. L. C. 607, 630.

(z) Tyrrell v. Bank of London, 10 H. L. C. 26; Kimber v. Barber, L. R. 8 Ch. 56; North American. Land and Timber Co., Ld. v. Wat-kins, 1904, 1 Ch. 242, 248; see also Re Olympia, Ld., 1898, 2 Ch. 153, affirmed nom. Gluckstein v. Barnes, 1900, A. C. 240.

(a) Spencer v. Topham, 22 Beav. 573; above, pp. 249, 250, 257 sq.

(b) Above, pp. 874 - 876.

(c) Above, pp. 876 - 882.

(d) Above, pp. 875, 879.

(e) See above, pp. 759, 760.

Title derived through a sale by one exercising an authority to sell to himself.

(f) Spencer v. Topham, 22 Beav. 573, 582.

{g) Above, pp. 882 sq., 896 - 903.

(h)Re Douglas and Powell's Contract, 1902, 2 Ch. 296; Delves V. Gray, ib. 606, 611.