The Main Principles of Agency Law Agency law is a commercial law area that revolves around the principal-agent relationship. Most of the organized human activity, including commercial one, is carried out through an agency, which makes this concept of particular importance. Furthermore, business organizations and enterprises depend on agents and how well they perform their responsibilities. In particular, the gig economy as a free-market system based on freelance work and short-term contracts identifies a new context for employers and employees to operate in. A number of concepts are involved in the law on the agency. An agency relationship refers to a scenario where one party (the agent) provides consent to act on behalf of another party (the principal) and take on a range of duties, rights, and liabilities by virtue of a contract (Jennings, 1). A principal is a person, corporation, organization, or government agency that has the legal capacity to enable an agent to perform a task. In turn, an agent is an individual representing the principal and carrying out tasks on their behalf. A principal owes the duties to compensate, reimburse, and indemnify the agent (Jennings, 1). An agent owes the fiduciary duty and a number of general duties to the principal, as per agency law (Jennings, 1). In this regard, the agency is a consensual and fiduciary relationship that involves responsibilities for both sides. In relation to Uber as part of the gig economy, a number of agency law principles apply. In particular, the express authority principle suggests that Uber (the principle) enters an explicit agreement with drivers (agent) and provides them with authority to deliver people from one point to another. Another principle is the apparent authority which provides that the principal has agreements with the third party, namely, customers, if they are led to believe that there is an agency relationship (Loewenstein, 2). The principle of ratification is another concept that applies to Uber and suggests that the principal can decide that the contract can be honored as if the agent has the full authority if when they do not (Jennings, 1). The working status of Uber drivers has caused numerous discussions even though their status is defined as independent contractors in the Service Agreement. However, as reported by SAY Hukuk Burosu, “on 19 February 2021, UK Supreme Court delivered a ruling which classified app-based UBER drivers as workers, instead of independent contractors” (2, para. 10). In other words, an agency relationship exists between Uber and the drivers. Uber’s Liability for the Conduct of a Driver When it comes to the liability of a principal for an agent’s torts or wrongful acts, the principal can be held responsible as a result of the legal authority given to the agent. Moreover, according to Jennings, “the liability of the principal for contracts made by an agent is controlled by the perceptions created for and observed by the third party to the contract (1, p. 570). There are several scenarios that might be involved, such as the disclosed, the partly disclosed, or the undisclosed principal. In this regard, Uber might be held liable for the driver’s conduct when the agent’s actions were within the scope of the apparent authority. Furthermore, the principal is also accountable for any fraud committed o