Coventry v Barclay: 1863

Partners had conducted their practice over many years in a manner inconsistent with the spirit if not the exact letter of their partnership articles. Stock was to be taken every year, and the value entered into the books to be signed off by each partner. On the last occasion a partner being ill did not sign the accounts, and later died. He had not expressed any dissatisfaction with the accounts.
Held: His estate was bound by the accounts as if he had signed them. The firm had each year set aside a certain sum against contingencies. The deceased partner’s estate was entitled to the return of his share in the fund.
(1863) 3 De G J and Sm 320, (1863) 3 New Rep 224, (1863) 9 LT 496
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedCruikshank v Sutherland HL 1923
The executors of a deceased partner of the respondents sought relief. The assets had been taken over from an earlier partnership between the parties and had been brought into the accounts of the new partnership at the values at which they had stood . .
CitedIn Re White (Dennis) Deceased; White v Minnis and Another CA 25-May-2000
A family partnership had carried freehold property at its historic cost value in the books, rather than at a market value. After the death of one partner the share came to be valued.
Held: Being a family partnership there was presumption that . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 February 2021; Ref: scu.238862