26 THE LAW AFFECTING ENGINEEKS 



discovered after the commencement of the action. It was 

 held that the receipt of the commission justified the dismissal, 

 although the actual dismissal took place on grounds which the 

 employers failed to prove, and the receipt of the commission 

 was an isolated case of misconduct. In that case, Lord 

 Justice Bowen said: " There can be no question that an agent 

 employed by a principal or master to do business with another, 

 who, unknown to that principal or master, takes from that 

 other person a profit arising out of the business which he is 

 employed to transact, is doing a wrongful act inconsistent 

 with his duty towards his master, and the continuance of 

 confidence between them. He does the wrongful act whether 

 such profit be given him in return for services which he 

 actually performs for the third party, or whether it be given 

 him for his supposed influence, or whether it be given him on 

 any other ground at all ; if it is a profit which arises out of 

 the transaction it belongs to his master, and the agent or 

 servant has no right to take it, or keep it, or bargain for it, or 

 to receive it without bargain, unless his master knows it." 



In Hovenden v. Millhqff, 1900, 83 L. T. 11, Lord Justice 

 Komer said : " If a gift be made to a confidential agent with 

 a view to inducing him to act in favour of the donor in relation 

 to transactions between the donor and the agent's principal, 

 and that gift is secret as between the donor and the agent 

 that is to say, without the knowledge and consent of the 

 principal the gift is a bribe in the view of the law. The 

 Court will not inquire into the motive of the vendor in giving 

 the bribe ; there is an irrefutable presumption that the agent 

 was influenced by it." 



16. Restrictive covenants generally. It is sometimes 

 necessary for an employer to make his employee enter into 

 what is known as a restrictive covenant, in order to prevent 

 him competing with his late employer at the end of the 

 contract of service. 



Broadly speaking, a covenant of this kind may be enforced, 

 provided it is reasonable, and reasonably necessary for the 

 protection of the master. To give an illustration : Suppose 

 the owner of a cotton mill inserted a clause in the agreement 

 with his manager to the effect that the manager, after leaving 

 the service, should never again be employed in connection 

 with, or himself carry on, the manufacture of cotton. Such 



