THE CHARTERED BANK v. RAYMOND SINCLAIR ROMAINE O\'NEILL AND JAMES WILLIAM MIDDLETON t/a PESTEX PEST CONTROL CO

THE CHARTERED BANK v. RAYMOND SINCLAIR ROMAINE O\'NEILL AND JAMES WILLIAM MIDDLETON t/a PESTEX PEST CONTROL CO

On the balance of probabilities the court accepted the second defendant's sworn statements and conduct as evidencing an enforceable oral partnership formed in 1977, making the second defendant liable for the partnership debts to the Plaintiff.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
THE CHARTERED BANK v. RAYMOND SINCLAIR ROMAINE O\'NEILL AND JAMES WILLIAM MIDDLETON t/a PESTEX PEST CONTROL CO
Parties
Plaintiff: THE CHARTERED BANK; First Defendant: RAYMOND SINCLAIR ROMAINE O'NEILL; Second Defendant: JAMES WILLIAM MIDDLETON trading as PESTEX PEST CONTROL COMPANY
Court
Court of First Instance
Jurisdiction
Hong Kong
Judgment Date
17 January 1983
Case Number
HCA8845/1981
Procedural Posture
Civil Debt and Partnership / Final Judgment (trial)
Outcome
Judgment for Plaintiff against Second Defendant for the sum claimed with interest and costs.
Legal Topics
Partnership Formation, Oral Agreement, Admissions in Evidence, Liability of Partners, Estoppel, Trust Receipt, Overdraft
Source Language
en
Partnership Law Contract Law Commercial Law Banking Law Partnership Formation Oral Agreement Admissions in Evidence Liability of Partners +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE CHARTERED BANK

Plaintiff

RAYMOND SINCLAIR ROMAINE O'NEILL

First Defendant

JAMES WILLIAM MIDDLETON trading as PESTEX PEST CONTROL COMPANY

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Debt and Partnership / Final Judgment (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second defendant was a partner at the time liabilities were incurred
  2. 2 Whether sworn admissions in earlier partnership proceedings established partnership
  3. 3 Whether parties' conduct and payments evidenced a partnership

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the court accepted the second defendant's sworn statements and conduct as evidencing an enforceable oral partnership formed in 1977, making the second defendant liable for the partnership debts to the Plaintiff.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Plaintiff against Second Defendant for the sum claimed with interest and costs.

Orders

  • Judgment for the Plaintiff against the Second Defendant for $155,235.69 with interest and costs.
  • Earlier judgment against the First Defendant obtained pursuant to Order 13 on 12 February 1982 remains noted.