header-logo header-logo

08 November 2017
Issue: 7769 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Partnership—Dissolution

Shah v Shah [2017] EWHC 2693 (Ch), [2017] All ER (D) 33 (Nov)

The Chancery Division made various orders concerning the final dissolution of a business, which had been carried out by four brothers as a partnership. Among other things, the court held that that, on the evidence, not all of the claims for an account had been established, but that two of the brothers, the first and second Pt 20 defendants, were jointly and severally liable to account to their brother, the Pt 20 claimant, in respect of a flat in Bombay, which had been included in an agreement between the parties, as an asset of the partnership, but which had been sold without reference to the Pt 20 claimant. Further, the court held that a bungalow in Bangalore, also mentioned in the agreement, had to be brought into account and that the first and second Pt 20 defendants were entitled to look to the Pt 20 claimant for one third of its value.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll