Partners had left the solicitors firm during the year. They had taken drawings calculated on the basis of anticipated profits, which not being met, the partnership sought to recover. The outgoing partners objected to being bound by accounts drawn after they had left.
Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. On a true construction of the deed, he was bound by the accounts, even though it required two different interpretations of the word ‘partner’ in the same clause, and even though he might be excluded from the meeting voting on the accounts. The clause was intended to provide a procedure for settling accounts so that they would in fact be binding on all partners.
Court:
CA
Date:
21-Dec-2009
Judges:
Lord Justice Sedley, Lord Justice Lloyd and Lord Justice Sullivan
Links:
Times,
Bailii,
References: [2009] EWCA Civ 1400,
Cases Cited: