Which agent violated the Law of Agency when negotiating the offer?

In the context of the Law of Agency, which governs the relationship between agents and their clients, the listing agent—the one representing the seller—has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the seller. If Joe, the listing agent, violated this law during negotiations, it would typically involve actions such as failing to disclose important information about the property, not presenting a legitimate offer to the seller, or negotiating against the interests of the seller, which would breach his obligation.

Lucy, as the buyer's subagent, represents the buyer and is responsible for advocating for the buyer's best interests. Her duties include communicating offers and negotiating terms, but her actions must align with the legal expectations of her role, typically facilitating the transaction without undermining her duty to her client while adhering to the broader legal framework.

If there is no indication that Lucy acted unethically or against legal requirements, and the violation is squarely placed on Joe's actions, it makes sense that Joe is identified as the agent who violated the Law of Agency. Thus, focusing on Joe's conduct clarifies the violation's source in the scenario, affirming his responsibilities as the listing agent and the legal implications of failing to uphold those duties.