This is the sixth edition of this stalwart of the Common Law Library since it was resuscitated by Professor Reynolds and the late Brian Davenport QC in 1968, and the fourth (and it seems the last) under the sole stewardship of the former. It is intended that future editions are to be entrusted to Professor Peter Watts of the University of Auckland, with the assistance of the current editor.

This 18th edition retains the classic structure of some 123 articles, consisting of principles, rules and sub-rules authoritatively stating fundamental propositions of the subject. These are accompanied by supporting illustrations, principally based on case law. These are further reinforced by commentary, originally introduced by Messrs Reynolds and Davenport in 1968. Such is the structure of the first 10 chapters, which is not carried over to Chapter 11, a discrete chapter on the Commercial Agents Regulations (the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993, as amended, which implement Council Directive 86/653). The text takes into account the decision of the Court of Appeal reining in the level of awards of compensation for the purpose of the Regulations in Lonsdale v. Howard & Hallam Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 63. However, the decision of the House of Lords in Lonsdale [2007] UKHL 32; [2007] 1 WLR 2055; [2008] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 78 came too late for this edition. This dire and unnecessary piece of European-inspired legislation was foisted on the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland—which had managed quite well without such measures—apparently on the basis that the French and Germans had laws in this regard, and a level-playing field required that all EU Member States were to be similarly afflicted. Even by Brussels standards, such reasoning now appears antiquated, but it is difficult to see the acquis communautaire being rapidly rolled back in this area. The UK implementation is also botched, being neither wholeheartedly based on German-inspired indemnity or on the French-influenced compensation. The English appellate courts have now rejected any automatic aping of French-style two-year’s gross commission as the benchmark award for such agents on termination, with a maximum of one year’s net commission being a more realistic outcome in many cases. The complexity and technicality of the subject is in inverse proportion to the modest sums in issue in the vast majority of disputes. One can see many County Court judges preferring the straightforward guidance of Moore-Bick LJ in the Court of Appeal over Lord Hoffmann’s more elaborate (albeit generally consistent) reasoning in the House of Lords. The discussion in Bowstead & Reynolds is useful, but is largely confined to the 38-page final chapter, which continues to be edited by Professor Michele Graziadei of the University of Torino. Given that the greater preponderance of current agency disputes are likely to arise from the Regulations it may be preferable in future to expand this chapter at the expense of some of the more arcane aspects of the text, and perhaps to involve in the authorship an English practitioner with experience of the operation of the Regulations.

There are two notable features of the latest edition of Bowstead & Reynolds . First, there is detailed reference to the Third American Restatement of Agency, under the aegis of Professor Deborah

243