The claimant firm of solicitors sought repayment of sums which it said were excess drawing from the defendants, former partners. Drawings had been taken against anticipated profits, and the retiring partners left as profits declined. The defendants said that they were not bound by accounts drawn after they left. The claimants said that a provision in the partnership deed made them binding for any part year for which a retiring partner had been a partner.
Held: The term partners in the appropriate clause referred to the individuals who were partners at any time during the relevant year. The accounts were binding on the retiring partners.
 EWHC 216 (Ch)
Cited – Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
Cited – Wylie v Corrigan and Ansari SCS 13-Oct-1998
The question was whether accounts which had been produced by the continuing partners, but which had been prepared not by them but by an auditor, were ones which they themselves could refer to arbitration or which, having been produced by them, were . .
Cited – City Alliance Ltd v Oxford Forecasting Services Ltd CA 16-Nov-2000
The parties disputed the construction of a clause in the contract between them.
Held: Chadwick LJ said: ‘It is not for party who relies upon the words actually used to establish that those words effect a sensible commercial purpose. It should . .
Appeal from – Hammonds LLP v Jones CA 21-Dec-2009
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 . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 February 2021; Ref: scu.304538