In his judgment Bankes L.J. refers to the line of cases represented by Strauss v. Francis which he refers to as those in which an agreement made by counsel has been embodied in some order or judgment of the court and the second, and different, line of cases which decide that before a consent order has been drawn up and perfected, the consent given by counsel or solicitor may be withdrawn by the client if the counsel or solicitor gave it under a misapprehension. In that case the court will not proceed with the drawing up and perfecting of the order and will not lend its authority to compel observance of an agreement arrived at through a mistake.
In the case now before us, no judgment had been perfected before the appellant asserted that there was a limitation on her solicitor's authority. Judgment was entered after it was known the plaintiff disputed that authority and without the court facing the issue of whether, in fact, the solicitor had authority. For if he had not, this case is no different from Shepherd v. Robinson and should have been restored to the list.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.