- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 year ago by
.
- Posts
Alvin, Simon and Theodore have been in partnership for many years running a vets practice. The partnership agreement states that all drugs are only to be purchased from a
pharmaceutical supplier called Dave.
On the 15th November, Alvin received £10,000 from the partnership’s bank which he obtained by informing them that they were planning to expand the partnership. In fact, he
is struggling to pay his mortgage and used the money to pay arrears.
Theodore has been suffering from ill health for a number of years and retired on the 1st December 2017. A letter was sent out to all existing customers to notify them of
Theodore’s retirement on the 19th November 2017.
On the 10th December 2017, Simon entered into a contract to buy drugs from a pharmaceutical supplier, Brittany. The drugs have been delivered but now Alvin is refusing
to pay for them.
Dave is due payment for drugs purchased by the partnership on the 19th December 2017.Question: identify the partners liability in respect of the Brittany Dave and Bank
Answer says Alvin is liable for all three
Theodore for Brittany and bank
Simon for all three.How can Theodore be liable for Brittany? Is there some mistake? Also why won’t he liable for Dave?
You ask “How can Theodore be liable for Brittany? Is there some mistake? Also why won’t he liable for Dave?”
Really important! “A letter was sent out to all existing customers to notify them of
Theodore’s retirement on the 19th November 2017.”On 15th November, Theodore was still a partner at the time of Alvin’s money withdrawal. So Theodore is liable. But should be able to recover from Alvin – if only Alvin had some money!
To whom was this letter announcing Theodore’s retirement sent? To ALL EXISTING CUSTOMERS … but there’s no mention there of existing and possible future suppliers.
So, on the 10th December 2017, how can Brittany have known that Theodore was no longer a partner?
Dave is due payment for drugs purchased by the partnership on the 19th December 2017. Was Dave notified by the partnership that Theodore had retired? I quote ‘ALL EXISTING CUSTOMERS’
What a stinker of a question! Aren’t you glad that you’re not Donald Trump’s lawyer 🙂
OK now?
As per Tower cabinet co vs Ingram 1949 notice is only required to be given to past and existing creditors
Brittany is a new one, how could Theodore possibly have contemplated the future transaction with that particular supplier and so given her the notice?Also is there a requirement to give notice in Gazette for people who have not dealt with the firm? And by a notice to the existing creditors?
The concept of putting notice in the Gazette is precisely to notify the rest of the World (that is not personally notified) of the change in circumstance of the partnership.
I believe that that answers your question (though I have to admit that I’m not sure what your final 8 words mean!)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.