Companies & Partnership Law Assignment 1 - Indicative Answer

Companies & Partnership Law

Question 1 (40% of this assignment)

Read the case of DINKO LUKIN v BRANKO LOVRINOV AND ANDJELKA LOVRINOV No. SCGRG-95-541 Judgment No. 6614 [1998] SASC 7105 (9 April 1998) available in Appendix A in the Study Guide, and answer the following questions:

1) In your own words, explain why the judge decided that the partnership had ended by 31 December 1993.

The judge decided that the partnership has been terminated on December 31st, 1993 as the partners were not interested in continuing the partnership and were not interested in taking part in business activities. As one of the partner wrote in a letter that we have to make something to finalize the partnership, and Ana they must talk to each other not with her as the business is of Dinko. And the writings of the one partner in which he explained that he is unable to contribute further in the partnership and address the other partners that do whatever they want of property of partnership that shows his wish to terminate the partnership.

2) In relation to partnership property, the Partnership Act 1891 (SA) contains s20. Part of the dispute in this case was in relation to the rights to a tuna quota granted by the Commonwealth Government in 1984. In your own words, explain how the judge applied this section and why he decided that these rights to the tuna quota were not the property of the partnership.

As the property of all partners was not utilized for the partnership purposes but not all partners contributed to the business. The license utilization of the with the endorsed quota was taken into partnership as income, and is definitely a related consideration. And the quota utilization was completely effected by its leasing. As the partnership business was fishing then leasing proceeds cannot be out of the quota, the partnership business is the part of the property for Branko Lovrinov and must be considered as partnership income until and unless the conducts of defendants in doing this was silent gratitude of the issue that they think it as partnership asset.

Question 2  (60% of this assignment)

1. Explain whether Adam and Zac formed a partnership.

Though the both fiends were agreed that Zac should remain in the area and continue with the explorations; whilst Adam would return to his part-time work and return to the mine on alternate weeks. And any income they made would be shared by them, in which Zac will be taking 2/3 and Adam will be 1/3 share but they do not made a partnership agreement or any other legal documentation required to register the partnership business thus their partnership was not formed legally. However they opened a joint account as they needed funds to purchase appropriate machinery, and they each mortgaged some personal property, not the partnership business asset, to obtain a bank loan of $60,000 and in addition contributed $20,000 each from personal funds. Opening a joint account is not a justification for ...