SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 643, 21 October 1909, Page 11

SUPREME COURT.

» .ACCOUNTS-IN-. PARTNERSHIP.' i VAVa sitting ,o'fthei'Suprema vCourt in Banco yesterday, • hia ( Honour Mr.Justice Chapman l.doliverctl. judgment in two eases heard , on , .Septomber'BO,' iS-which.the accounts of a Mas- ■ torton firm of, cycle. agents came up for review/ Tho defendants, were' Harold , Sinclair i and : David Gardiner :Brown, who had been-trading ' in Mastertou 4s Sinolair - and Brown.. Tho ' :Gycle' ; and 'Mbtbif 'Suppliesj" Etil., claimed, tho sum of. .£37 .10s., .ana E.vlieynoldsand . Co., . : Ltd.;',;v£l3s.;Vrhe; amounts' were/alleged to : be debts inourred by dofondantsin their retail bußii\e6S/ ;'andi'.ri3prs?efitod 'dishonoured :promiß- - notes. • Mr#; HadJeld.-appeared for'.. the - Cycle' and Motor Supplies,-Ltd., Mt. W. H. D. Bell for : 10. Reynolds',and • Co.-.-- andvjfr. Pownall, "of Maste'rioti;! for ithe deffin'dan£;Brovrn. ! v l It was, stattJd-in .evidence iit !tbol:heariiig that : Sinolair, before; taking Brown into partnership, : had an:ftc«ottnt.withiboth-plaintilfs, find,when Brown joined the Übusiaess'th® accounts were rondered.to •,the 'moneys' Werii paid, and plaintiffs held that both defendants . wore liable for; tlto balance of .tho. debt owing. Counsel urged that when 1 a new partner cinio :'. 'into.a-firm:; and-the original was carried; into the ino'w accbnlit,.'it-was exceedingly difficult for the new partner to evade liability, unless he.were very careful. . . ' . , - tho, action ibrought' by .the Cycle Supplies' Co., his Honour said • that Sinclair had: confessed judgment, but Brown:defended.-,When'Sinclair took Browtt . into'partnership,'Consignments' oh goods- wero : stiU sent to.-.Masterton. to.' tho iirm,: and acCounts.'were" rendered: to. tho firm. Sinclair and i Prown.. The .account:,, with, Sinclair.'aud that ~ with ; ; the ' ; firtn .. were'': 'made ■' cdntinuoM.The : question tobe, decided wai' whether Brown was ; liable;.to';tho plaintiffs... The defendant firm Received, notice. : from .tho ; plaintiffs . tho- '■ partnershipacc'mlnfe'was 'tb' be'-"iriefg6cl'' rato"'- >. Sinclair's , brißinal,.acfovtnt,.,.and.. his::.Hononr : cottld' not* - Say; whether /■ the plaihtift'i 'should .have made .any assumption as to whether "theif notice •reachodi:the : eyes of both partners or of only- one j it had been openly addressed to the firm, and it reached -its,destination. Plaintiffs :■ were entitled 'to judgment for , tho dmbunt of : tho .note, ,£3.7■ 10s., ■ .and 6 ipor.-cehtl .interest • with .costs-;on the. lowest 1 seal#,'.'witnesses' 0x- ... penses.. and .disbursements to be; fixed. by the Registrar.. , : In regard'to the second case, his Honour re- . marked that apparently, the firm had not lebpt '' prbpef -' boolts; and both'partners wore .respon,sible.. Reynolds and' Co.: were. enjtitjed .to-, treat :. 'frith-: the firm,; ''having . iib"' notice;.-and no ■ grounds for suspecting,-that-there existed-any divergonte: of- interests between the partners. :> P!a)ntilFs -were entitled: Uo ■ recover on'.tho threo, notes. (.£45, eaoh), 'wj.th nt'Gjpor Cent.';,costs. to bo' allowed on the ' lowesti'scale : : and ■ witnesses' / expenses jind..; disbursements i to ; bo .fixed .'by .the-'-Hcgistrar.' ' 'v .