I just stdy bout law, Sale of Goods Act and suddenly remember bout the famous ever case in our batch in another act that is Partnership Act. Wanna noe y? on our test last week, we all spot bout this case will come out , but frustratingly we cnt relate the answer with our case and the test was so tough.
Section 31 of Partnership Act 1961-stated that every partner must inform or explain in any benefit that his/her receive with agreement from all the partner in transaction of their partnership or property, name or business connection.
The related case RW Pathirana v Ariya Pathirana (1967)1 A.C.233
Pathirana & Ariya Pathirana were partners in business of selling petrol(Caltex). Despute arose between them, Ariya Pathirana gave three(3) months notice to resign (from the date of 10/9/1948).Before the period was expired, Ariya Pathirana persuaded Caltex to change the name of the firm to his name stating that their partnership was ended. This was done without RW Pathirana’s knowledge & consent. Ariya Pathirana ran the business and did not account the profits to RW Pathirana. RW Pathirana took legal action against Ariya Pathirana
Court Held: RW Pathirana was entitled for the profits because both of them were partners
No comments:
Post a Comment