Nor may an agent purchase for himself the very goods he has been instructed to sell, not even by paying the highest price that might be offered, nor by paying more—except that he may buy a portion of them at the same price for which he has sold. He is, however, entitled to accept from himself whatever collateral he has been ordered to take in pledge.

If someone commissions an agent to sell a commodity and the agent accepts payment in something other than silver dirhams or gold dinars, the mandate does not bind the principal. Mālik nevertheless recommended that the non-cash goods be resold: should that resale yield more than the original value, the surplus belongs to the principal; if it yields less, the agent must make up the shortfall.

When a man instructs another to purchase a slave for him and the agent buys a person whom the purchaser is obliged to manumit—his own father or son, for example—then, if the agent knew this and did so deliberately, he has overstepped his authority: the principal is not bound and the agent is liable. If he was unaware, the mandate stands and the slave is automatically set free at the principal’s expense.

If the principal hands the agent dirhams to buy an item, the agent completes the purchase, and the dirhams are lost after the purchase, the agent may claim their equivalent from the principal. Mālik holds the same when the agent buys before receiving any money, then the principal reimburses him and that money is later lost: the agent still has recourse against the principal—unless the agent had first paid the price from his own pocket and the principal later reimbursed him, after which the money was lost. In that case nothing further is due from the principal, for he has already settled his debt.

Should an agent be deputed to buy an animal and he purchases one afflicted with a ruinous defect, the principal is not bound by the sale; if the defect is slight and not harmful, the sale stands.

If a principal tells an agent to sell something, the agent claims, “I sold it to so-and-so for such-and-such a price,” the named buyer denies the sale, and the agent has no proof, Mālik deems the agent liable for the price because he neglected to bring witnesses. The majority of scholars do not hold him liable.

Mālik issues the same ruling when a man hands someone dirhams to deliver to a third party: if the messenger delivers them without witnesses and the recipient later denies receiving them, the messenger is liable—unless he had stipulated with the sender that he would deliver without witnesses and that his word would suffice. That stipulation protects him, and no liability falls upon him.

And whoever appoints an agent to purchase—