. The Montreal law reports [microform]. Law reports, digests, etc; Law; Jurisprudence; Droit. i^'" ' 'fl^-;. iff'' -^ .% . «âCOURT OF QUKBNH HKNOkP out it« terms, and app«llMit went into the premisei of B i. NowoU & Oompany, and appeared thwre from day to 'day before the publU; and the i;a9tomera,of the firm an having apparent control over the boaineM. ⢠I In the following year the huHineuR became unprofitable, and B L. Nowell & Co. made an^aaigument to the rea- pond«nt Fatt. In this abandonment Nowell put the ap- pellant down as a creditor for |l, »^ .; , ^ After the
. The Montreal law reports [microform]. Law reports, digests, etc; Law; Jurisprudence; Droit. i^'" ' 'fl^-;. iff'' -^ .% . «âCOURT OF QUKBNH HKNOkP out it« terms, and app«llMit went into the premisei of B i. NowoU & Oompany, and appeared thwre from day to 'day before the publU; and the i;a9tomera,of the firm an having apparent control over the boaineM. ⢠I In the following year the huHineuR became unprofitable, and B L. Nowell & Co. made an^aaigument to the rea- pond«nt Fatt. In this abandonment Nowell put the ap- pellant down as a creditor for |l, »^ .; , ^ After the estate had been realized, and waa ready for _di8tribution, the curator contested the claim of appellant. The grounds of the oliteHtation were three: 1. The curator alleged that the agreement entered jnto between the appellant and the insolvent on the Brd June, 1887, waa a simulAted document, and,' while pretending to be an agreement for the loan of money and the hire of services, in reality constituted a partnership between them. 2. That claimant by hia acts held himself out, and in- duced customers of the firm to believe that ho was a partner, atad "waa introduced as such by Nowell (the in- solvent) without objection. 8. That a portion of the profits of the husi- 18 durinff/the first seven months after liis connection h it, in Iddition to his interest and salary. The conteatatioiji was maintained by the judgment cited ^iMay^l, i52, t890.] i GeiffrioH, Q. C, and Leet, for the appellant, thatihe agreement of 3rd June, 1887, did not MdFarlane a partner with B. L. Xowell, and tt vvAsliot govetned by Davie Sr Sylpestre, M L. R., 5 Q. B. J|^. Anotlier objection to the judgment was this: The M«mdonment wa* made by B. L. Nowell only, doing bi^^n^ alone under the name of " B. L. Nowell & Co.]' Cons^uently, the creditors filed their claims, the curator and/iifBpectois were appointed not to a partnership of NfrnjiU ir MeFarltme^ but to a
Size: 1723px × 1450px
Photo credit: © The Book Worm / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., books, booksubjectdroit, booksubjectjurisprudence, booksubjectlaw
