The World Federation One Stop Fiqh
Search
Menu

19. Agency (Wikālah)

Agency is the act of delegating a transaction (muʿāmalah) that a person has the right to perform himself to someone else so that he may perform the task on his behalf. The transaction may be a contract (ʿaqd) or a unilateral instigation (īqāʿ)1 or something related to these, such as handing over and taking possession of something. For example, a person may appoint an agent (wakīl) to sell his house for him or marry him to a woman. Therefore, someone who is foolish with finances (safīh)2 cannot appoint an agent to sell his house for him as he does not have right of disposal over his property.

1 The difference between a ‘contract’ and a ‘unilateral instigation’ is as follows: with a contract, two parties are required – one to make the offer and the other to accept it. Marriage, therefore, is an example of a contract. In contrast, in a unilateral instigation, one party alone executes the transaction, as is the case with divorce.

2 Ruling 2091 provides further clarification of this term: it refers to someone who spends his wealth in futile ways.

+ Read more
  • Ruling 2285

    If a person appoints a number of people to be his agents to perform a task and authorises each of them to act solitarily in the performance of that task, then any one of them can perform that …

    + Read more
  • Ruling 2286

    If the agent or the principal dies, the agency becomes void. If the item over which the person was appointed to have disposal perishes – for example, the sheep that the person was appointed to sell dies – …

    + Read more
  • Ruling 2287

    If a person appoints someone to be his agent to perform a task and agrees on a remuneration, then upon completion of the task, he must remunerate him according to the agreement.

    + Read more
  • Ruling 2288

    If an agent is not negligent in safeguarding the property that has been placed in his possession and does not use it in any manner except in the way he was authorised, and it so happens the property …

    + Read more
  • Ruling 2289

    If an agent is negligent in safeguarding the property that has been placed in his possession or uses it in a manner that was not authorised and the property is destroyed, he is responsible for it. Therefore, if …

    + Read more
  • Ruling 2290

    If an agent uses the property in a manner that was not authorised – for example, he wears a piece of clothing that he was told to sell – and he thereafter disposes of it as he was …

    + Read more