(1)To carry out the agency which he has accepted; (2) To answer for damages which through his

performance the principal may suffer (Ibid.); (3) To fi nish the business already begun on the death of the principal should delay entail any danger (Ibid.); (4) To observe the diligence of a good father of a family in the custody and preservation of the goods forwarded to him by the owner in case he declines an agency, until an agent is appointed Where an agent makes use of the power of attorney after the death of his principal, the agent has the obligation to deliver the amount collected by him by virtue of said power to the administrator of the estate of the principal. (Ramos vs. Cavives, 94 Phil. 440 [1954].) Instructions are private directions which the principal may give the agent in regard to the manner of performing his duties as such agent but of which a third party is ignorant. They are said to be secret if the principal intended them not to be made known to such party. AUTHORITY right/power to enforce command If he acts in good faith and with due care, the agent is not liable for losses due to errors or mistakes of judgment as regards to matters with which he is vested with discretionary powers. It will be presumed that the agent acted in good faith and in accordance with his power as hereunder stood it. (Lian vs. Puno, 31 Phil. 529 [1915].) When an agent, in executing the orders and commissions of his principal, carries out the instructions he has received from his principal, and does not appear to have exceeded his authority or to have acted with negligence, deceit, or fraud, he cannot be held responsible for the failure of his principal to accomplish the object of the agency. (Gutierrez Hermanos vs. Oria Hermanos, 30 Phil. 491 [1915]; G. Puyat & Sons, Inc. vs. Arco Amusement Company, 72 Phil. 402 [1941].) When departure from principals instructions justified? 1A departure from instructions may be justified by a sudden emergency. 2 ambigous instructions 3 insubstantial departure(w/c does not affect the result. It has been held that an agent who has been authorized to sell some merchandise cannot bind the principal by selling to himself (agent) directly or indirectly. It results that the principal is not required to fi ll orders taken by the agent from his own sub-agent unless the principal ratifies such sale after he has full knowledge of the facts. (Barton vs. Leyte Asphalt, 46 Phil. 938 [1924].) ART. 1890. >If the agent has been empowered to borrow money, he may himself be the lender at the current rate of interest. >If he has been authorized to lend money at interest, he cannot borrow it without the consent of the principal. When obligation to account not applicable. (1) The duty embodied in Article 1891 will not apply if the agent or broker acted only as a middleman with the task of merely bringing together the vendor and the vendee, who themselves thereafter will negotiate on the terms and conditions of the transaction. (2) Neither would the rule apply if the agent or broker had informed the principal of the gift or bonus or profi t he received from the purchaser and his principal did not object thereto. (Ibid.) (3) Where a right of lien exists in favor of the agent, the rule is not also applicable. (a) The agent may, under Article 1914, retain in pledge the things which are the object of the agency until the principal effects the reimbursement and pays the indemnity provided in Articles 1912 and 1913. (b) A lawyer shall have a lien upon the funds, documents and papers of his client and may retain the same until his lawful fees and disbursements have been paid Report imports a statement of collections Accounting settling of accounts of administration or agency; Distinguished from possession of servant or messenger An agent, unlike a servant or messenger, has both the physical and juridical possession5 of the goods received in agency, or the proceeds thereof, which take the place of the goods after their sale by the agent. Distinguished from possession of teller of bank >In the former case, payment by third persons to the teller is payment to the bank itself >An agent, on the other hand, can even assert, as against his own principal, an independent, autonomous right to retain the money or goods received in consequence of the agency, as when the principal fails to reimburse him for advances he has made, and indemnify for damages suffered without his fault. > (b) Where a sales agent misappropriates or fails to turn over to his principal proceeds of things or goods he was commissioned or authorized to sell for the latter, he is guilty of estafa. >a receiving teller of a bank who misappropriates money received by him for the bank is guilty of qualified theft

ART. 1892. The agent may appoint a substitute if the principal has not prohibited him from doing so; but he shall be responsible for the acts of the substitute: (1) When he was not given the power to appoint one; (2) When he was given such power, but without designating the person, and the person