BROTHERS AT LAW

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLVIII, Issue 21556, 19 January 1940, Page 8

BROTHERS AT LAW

EX-LORD MAYOR WINS SEQUEL TO AN ASSAULT LONDON, December 19. In the Chancery Division Mr Justice Simonds gave judgment in an action brought by Sir Percy Greenaway, Bart., of Eastcott, Kingston Hill, Lord Mayor of London in 1932-33, against his brother, Sidney Herbert Greenaway, of Shenstone House. Essex. Sir Percy claimed a declaration that he had served a valid notice on defendant on February 14. 1939. expelling him from the partnership carried on by them in the business of Daniel Greenaway and Sons, printers and stationers. Sir Percy alleged that his brother “habitually and unreasonably” quarrelled with him and that, on January 24 last, defendant assaulted him. The allegations were denied, and Mr Greenaway said that Sir Percy had “violently and unreasonably” quarrelled with him. Constant Friction Mr Justice Simonds said there had been constant friction between the partners, but this was no ground for dissolution, or still less for expulsion, but it might very well explain a state of affairs between two such men which might otherwise be regarded as inexplicable. That constant friction having gone on for many years, on February 14 last, Sir Percy purported to exercise his rights under the partnership articles and to send a notice expelling his brother from the partnership. In this he stated that his brother had committed an inexplicable assault upon him on January 24; that the general interests of the partners was likely to suffer, and that defendant had acted contrary to the good faith which ought to be observed between them as partners. Clearly that was an act which justified Sir Percy in exercising his power of expulsion. It appeared to the Judge that a man nearer 70 than 60 was entitled to say that he should not be subjected to the possibility of such an assault. It was natural and proper that partners should disagree at times, but they must bo loyal to each other. Mr Greenaway had not observed that loyalty. Mr Greenaway might have been irritated at what he considered to be the wrong views and dilatoriness of his partner, but he had no right to express his opinion to employees of the firm. Assets to be Realised That Judge held that Mr Greenaway was validly expelled from the partnership by the notice of February 14 last. The partnership being dissolved, he said, Sir Percy and Mr Greenaway would be entitled to the proceeds of the realisation of the assets. He held that the partnership was determined on February 14, and he directed that partnership accounts should be taken and an inquiry held as to what constituted the assets. In reply to Mr Charles Harman, K.C. (for the defence), the Judge said that he would appoint both partners as receivers and managers without security and without remuneration. Mr Harman: It may be that we may be able to go on without such a thing at all. Mr Justice Simonds: It merely means that you are responsible to the Court. Sir Percy was awarded the costs of the action.