Rahman v Ahmed [2009] NSWSC 1028

Rahman v Ahmed [2009] NSWSC 1028

The defendant acted unreasonably in disputing the existence of the partnership, and it was almost certain the plaintiff would have succeeded if the matter had been fully tried; consequently, an order for costs is made against the defendant personally rather than out of partnership assets, displacing the usual partnership costs rule.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Equity / Judgment After Settlement Except for Costs; Interlocutory Issues on Costs Considered
Outcome
Declarations made for existence and termination of partnership; order for taking of partnership accounts; defendant to pay plaintiff’s costs; further determination of the precise form of costs order to follow.
Legal Topics
['dissolution of Partnership' 'winding Up' 'taking of Accounts' 'costs Discretion' 'partnership Disputes']
['partnership' 'equity'] ['dissolution of Partnership' 'winding Up' 'taking of Accounts' 'costs Discretion' 'partnership Disputes']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity / Judgment After Settlement Except for Costs; Interlocutory Issues on Costs Considered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a partnership existed between plaintiff and defendant' 'Whether the partnership was terminated on 7 February 2006' 'How costs of the proceedings should be borne post-settlement']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant acted unreasonably in disputing the existence of the partnership, and it was almost certain the plaintiff would have succeeded if the matter had been fully tried; consequently, an order for costs is made against the defendant personally rather than out of partnership assets, displacing the usual partnership costs rule.

Court Disposition

Declarations made for existence and termination of partnership; order for taking of partnership accounts; defendant to pay plaintiff’s costs; further determination of the precise form of costs order to follow.

Orders

  • ["Declare that between August 2003 and 7 February 2006 the plaintiff and the defendant carried on the business known as 'Bexley Petroleum' as a partnership." 'Declare that the partnership was terminated on 7 February 2006.' 'Order a taking of accounts of all sums due as between the defendant and the plaintiff...