Pre-existence
major difference, and a key insight to Mormons' understanding of free agency, between mainstream Christians and Latter-day Saints involves the belief of a life before mortality, called the Pre-existence. Latter-day Saints believe that before the earth was created, all mankind lived in a pre-existent life as spirit children of God.[7] Here Heavenly Father nurtured, taught and provided means for their development. This preparation would allow them to later become the men and women of Earth, to be further educated and tested in the schoolhouse of mortality in order to return to God's presence and become like Him. Thus the pre-existent life is believed to have been an indefinitely long period of probation, progression, and schooling. Mormons believe that there came a time when we could not progress further without being born in to a body and experiencing earthly life.[8]
According to Mormon beliefs, God the Father proposed a plan whereby further progression could take place, a Plan of salvation. Because agency would allow all people to fall in sin (and, in fact, scripture teaches that all people will sin), a Savior was necessary to atone for the sins of each person so that they could return to live with their Father in Heaven. Jesus volunteered to follow the plan as outlined, which preserved agency, accountability for action and the necessary result that some of Heavenly Father's children would never to return to Heavenly Father as a consequence of sin. The second volunteer, Lucifer, attempted to amend the plan by proposing that all mankind would return to Heavenly Father despite their sins - essentially, defeating agency and the divine principal of accountability for action. God the Father chose the plan that he proposed with Jesus as the Savior. Lucifer and his followers rebelled against this plan and were eventually cast out of Heaven and became Satan.[9]
Agency (law)
Agency is an area of Commercial law dealing with a contractual or quasi-contractual tripartite set of relationships when an Agent is authorised to act on behalf of another (called the Principal) to create a legal relationship with a Third Party. This branch of law separates and regulates the relationships between:
Agents and Principals;
Agents and the Third Parties with whom they deal on their Principals' behalf; and
Principals and the Third Parties when the Agents purport to deal on their behalf.
The common law principle in operation is usually represented in the Latin phrase, qui facit per alium, facit per se, i.e. the one who acts through another, acts in his or her own interests and it is a parallel concept to vicarious liability and strict liability in which one person is held liable in Criminal Law or Tort for the acts or omissions of another..Contents [hide]
1 The concepts
2 Brief statement of legal principles
2.1 Authorit
2.2 Liability of Agent to Third Party
2.3 Liability of Agent to Principal
2.4 Liability of Principal to Agent
2.5 Liability of Third Party to Principal
2.6 Duties
2.7 Termination
3 Agency and partnership
4 Agency relationships
5 See also
[edit]
The concepts
The reciprocal rights and liabilities of Principal and Agent reflect commercial needs and legal realities. In any business of size, it is not possible for one person to travel everywhere to negotiate all the transactions necessary to maintain or grow the business. These problems are increased if the business is a corporation, because it is then a fictitious legal person and, as such, it can only act through human agents. Hence, independent people are contracted by businesses to buy and sell goods and services on behalf of those businesses. When agreements are made, the Principal is liable under the contract(s) made by the Agent. So long as the Agent has done what he or she was instructed to do, the result is the same as if the Principal had done it directly.
If the issue is considered from the view of innocent Third Parties, they are approached by a person who is clearly identified as acting for another. They deal with that person in good faith, relying on the representation of authority. Indeed, in a busy commercial world, it would not be cost-effective to check that everyone who is represented as having the authority to act for another actually has that authority. Deals are done at face value in the majority of routine situations. If it should later appear that the alleged agent was acting without the consent of the Principal, the Principal will usually be held liable. Any other decision would be unduly disruptive to the usual flow of trade. This commercial necessity has led to the creation of a body of law that applies in any situation, commercial or otherwise, where one person is seen to be acting for another
[edit]
Brief statement of legal principles
There are three broad classes of Agent:
Universal Agents hold broad authority to act on behalf of the Principal, e.g. they may hold a power of attorney (also known as a mandate in civil law jurisdictions) or have a professional relationship, say, as lawyer and client.
General Agents hold a more limited authority to conduct a series of transactions over a continuous period of time; and
Special Agents are authorised to conduct either only a single transaction or a specified series of transactions over a limited period of time.
[edit]
Authority
For these purposes, the Principal must give, or be deemed to give, the Agent authority to act
Actual authority:
This arises where the Principal's words or conduct reasonably cause the Agent to believe that he or she has been authorized to act. This may be express in the form of a contract or implied because what is said or done make it reasonably necessary for the person to assume the powers of an Agent. If it is clear that the Principal gave actual authority to Agent, all the Agent's actions falling within the scope of the authority given will bind the Principal. This will be the result even if, having actual authority, the Agent in fact acts fraudulently for his own benefit unless the Third Party was aware of the Agent's personal agenda. If there is no contract but the Principal's words or conduct reasonably led the Third Party to believe that the Agent was authorized to act, or if what the Agent proposes to do is incidental and reasonably necessary to accomplish an actually authorized transaction or a transaction that usually accompanies it, then the Principal will be bound.
Apparent or ostensible authority:
If the Principal's words or conduct would lead a reasonable person in the Third Party’s position to believe that the Agent was authorized to act, say by appointing the Agent to a position which carries with it agency-like powers, those who know of the appointment are entitled to assume that there is apparent authority to do the things ordinarily entrusted to one occupying such a position. If a Principal creates the impression that an Agent is authorized but there is no actual authority, Third Parties are protected so long as they have acted reasonably. This is sometimes termed "Agency by Estoppel" or the "Doctrine of Holding Out", where the Principal will be estopped from denying the grant of authority if Third Parties have changed their positions to their detriment in reliance on the representations made.
Authority by virtue of a position held:
For example, partners have apparent authority to bind the other partners in the firm, their liability being joint and several (see below), and in a corporation, all executives and senior employees with decision-making authority by virtue of their declared position have apparent authority to bind the corporation
Even if the Agent does act without authority, the Principal may ratify the transaction and accept liability on the transactions as negotiated. This may be express or implied from the Principal's behaviour, e.g. if the Agent has purported to act in a number of situations and the Principal has knowingly acquiesced, the failure to notify all concerned of the Agent's lack of authority is an implied ratification to those transactions and an implied grant of authority for future transactions of a similar nature.
[edit]
Liability of Agent to Third Part
If the Agent has actual or apparent authority, the Agent will not have liability on any transactions agreed within the scope of that authority so long as the Principal was disclosed, i.e. the fact of the agency was revealed and the identity of the Principal revealed. But where the agency is undisclosed or partially disclosed, both the Agent and the Principal are bound. Where the Principal is not bound because the Agent had no actual or apparent authority, the purported Agent is liable to the Third Party for breach of the implied warranty of authority.
[edit]
Liability of Agent to Principal
If the Agent has acted without actual authority, but the Principal is nevertheless bound because the Agent had apparent authority, the Agent is liable to indemnify the Principal for any resulting loss or damage.
[edit]
Liability of Principal to Agent
If the Agent has acted within the scope of the actual authority given, the Principal must indemnify the Agent for payments made during the course of the relationship whether the expenditure was expressly authorised or merely necessary in promoting the Principal’s business.
[edit]
Liability of Third Party to Principal
The Third Person will be liable to the Principal on the terms of the agreement made with the Agent unless the Principal was undisclosed and there is clear evidence that either the Agent or the Principal knew that the Third Party would not have entered into the agreement if he or she had known of the Principal's involvement.
[edit]
Duties
The Agent's primary fiduciary duty is to be loyal to the Principal. This involves duties:
not to accept any new obligations that are inconsistent with the duties owed to the Principal. Agents can represent the interests of more than one Principal, conflicting or potentially conflicting, only on the basis of full and timely disclosure or where the different agencies are based on a limited form of authority to prevent a situation where the Agent's loyalty to any one of the Principals is compromised. For this purpose, express clauses in the agreement signed by each Principal with the Agent may identify specific types or categories of activities that will not breach the duty of loyalty and so long as these exceptions are not unreasonable, they will bind the Principals
not to make a private profit or unjustly enrich himself from the agency relationship.
In return, the Principal must make a full disclosure of all information relevant to the transactions that the Agent is authorised to negotiate and pay the Agent either the commission or fee as agreed, or a reasonable fee if none was agreed.
[edit]
An Agent's authority can be terminated at any time. If the trust between the Agent and Principal has broken down, it is not reasonable to allow the Principal to remain at risk in any transactions that the Agent might conclude during a period of notice.
[edit]
Agency and partnership
This has become a more difficult area as states are not consistent on the nature of a partnership. Some states opt for the partnership as no more than an aggregate of the natural persons who have joined the firm. Others treat the partnership as a business entity and, like a corporation, vest the partnership with a separate legal personality. Hence, for example, in English law, a partner is the agent of the other partners whereas, in Scots law where there is a separate personality, a partner is the agent of the partnership. This form of agency is inherent in the status of a partner and does not arise out of a contract of agency with a Principal. In the English Partnership Act 1890 provides that a partner who acts within the scope of his actual authority (express or implied) will bind the partnership when he does anything in the ordinary course of carrying on partnership business. Even if that implied authority has been revoked or limited, the partner will have apparent authority unless the Third Party knows that the authority has been compromised. Hence, if the partnership wishes to limit any partner's authority, it must give express notice of the limitation to the world. However, there would be little substantive difference if English law was amended (see Law Commission Report 283 [1]): partners will bind the partnership rather than their fellow partners individually. For these purposes, the knowledge of the partner acting will be imputed to the other partners or the firm if a separate personality. The other partners or the firm are the Principal and Third Parties are entitled to assume that the Principal has been informed of all relevant information. This causes problems when one partner acts fraudulently or negligently and causes loss to clients of the firm. In most states, a distinction is drawn between knowledge of the firm's general business activities and the confidential affairs as they affect one client. Thus, there is no imputation if the partner is acting against the interests of the firm as a fraud. There is more likely to be liability in tort if the partnership benefitted by receiving fee income for the work negligently performed, even if only as an aspect of the standard provisions of vicarious liability. Whether the injured party wishes to sue the partnership or the individual partners is usually a matter for the Plaintiff since, in most jurisdictions, their liability is joint and several.
Agency relationships
Agency relationships are common in many professional areas.
employment procurement (modelling agency)
real estate transactions (real estate brokerage, mortgage brokerage). In real estate brokerage, the buyers or sellers are the Principals themselves and the broker or his/her salesperson who represents each Principal is his/her Agent.
financial advice (insurance agency, stock brokerage, accountancy)
contract negotiation and promotion (business management) such as for publishing, music, movies, theatre, show business and sport.
The negotiation of entertainment and sports deals and in many day to day transactions where one person (the "agent") is allowed to stand in for another individual to fulfil their wishes. Models, actors, and athletes have Agents who secure opportunities and benefits for them. In publishing an Agent acts for an author to sell their manuscript. Publishers often pay greater attention to manuscripts submitted by an Agent than directly (via the slush pile).
International organization
An international organization, or more formally intergovernmental organization (IGO), is an organization whose members are sovereign states or other IGOs (like the European Union and the WTO). Such organizations function according to the principles of intergovernmentalism, which means that unanimity is required. The European Union is however an exception to this rule in some areas.
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are private organizations that can also be international in scope. Generally and correctly used, however, the term "international organization" is reserved for intergovernmental organizations only. It is in this sense that the term is used in the remainder of this article.Contents [hide]
1 Legal nature
2 Membership and function
3 Examples of organizations
3.1 Global organizations
3.2 Regional organizations
3.3 Organizations with various membership criteria
3.4 Financial international organizations
4 See also
[edit]
Legal nature
Legally speaking, an international organization must be established by a treaty providing it with legal recognition. International organizations so established are subjects of international law, capable of entering into agreements among themselves or with states. Thus international organizations in a legal sense are distinguished from mere groupings of states, such as the G-8 and the G-77, neither of which have been founded by treaty, though in non-legal contexts these are sometimes referred to as international organizations as well.
International organizations must also be distinguished from treaties; while all international organizations are founded on a treaty, many treaties (e.g., the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)) do not establish an international organization and rely purely on the parties for the......
[edit]
Membership nd function
International organizations differ in function, membership and membership criteria. Membership of some organizations (global organizations) is open to all the nations of the world. This category includes the United Nations and its specialized agencies and the World Trade Organization. Other organizations are only open to members from a particular region or continent of the world, like European Union, African Union, ASEAN and so on.
Finally, some organizations base their membership on other criteria: cultural or historical links (the Commonwealth of Nations, La Francophonie, the Community of Portuguese Language Countries), level of economic development or type of economy (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Organization of Petroleum-Exporting Countries (OPEC)), or religion (Organization of the Islamic Conference)
Were it to come about, the ultimate international organization would be a Federal World Government.
In the nineteenth century, France was the fons et origo of many international organizations: This means that much of the driving force to form such bodies (such as those which maintain the SI (metric system)) came from the French, and that their headquarters is in France, often in Paris. Under the Third Republic, the International Exposition of 1878 in that city held a great number of meetings of such international organizations - as opposed to the preceding regimes. The motivation was that to keep France a republic and not slip back into either a monarchist or Bonapartist regime, the republicans would underscore their inheritance of the crusading nature of the French Revolution against feudal cultural remnants within France, which had been generalized to the rest of feudal Europe, eventually to the world. Some conclude from this example that internationalism often has national origins, at the difference of globalism.
The Union of International Associations provides information on international organizations.
Agency, Missouri
Agency is a village in Buchanan County, Missouri in the United States. The population was 599 at the 2000 census.
[edit]
Geography
Agency is located at 39°38′55″N, 94°44′40″W (39.648739, -94.744418)GR1.
According to the United States Census Bureau, the village has a total area of 5.0 km² (1.9 mi²), all land.
[edit]
Demographics
As of the censusGR2 of 2000, there were 599 people, 214 households, and 176 families residing in the village. The population density was 119.2/km² (309.3/mi²). There were 222 housing units at an average density of 44.2/km² (114.6/mi²). The racial makeup of the village was 98.50% White, 0.50% Asian, 0.50% from other races, and 0.50% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 1.67% of the population.
There were 214 households out of which 44.4% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 69.6% were married couples living together, 9.3% had a female householder with no husband present, and 17.3% were non-families. 12.6% of all households were made up of individuals and 2.8% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.80 and the average family size was 3.04.
In the village the population was spread out with 30.1% under the age of 18, 6.5% from 18 to 24, 33.7% from 25 to 44, 24.5% from 45 to 64, and 5.2% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 35 years. For every 100 females there were 104.4 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 96.7 males.
The median income for a household in the village was $49,375, and the median income for a family was $52,500. Males had a median income of $37,969 versus $24,018 for females. The per capita income for the village was $20,304. About 3.7% of families and 6.1% of the population were below the poverty line, including 7.1% of those under age 18 and 9.1% of those age 65 or over.
