Maillie v Swanney & Ors [2000] ScotCS 29 (1 February 2000)

Maillie v Swanney & Ors [2000] ScotCS 29 (1 February 2000)

The partnership agreement, as modified by the deeds of assumption, provided an intelligible and exhaustive framework for the duration and termination of the partnership, permitting dissolution only by mutual agreement or in accordance with specified contractual provisions. Section 32(c) of the Partnership Act 1890 did not apply, and the pursuer was not entitled to dissolve the partnership by unilateral notice. The notice served by the pursuer was therefore invalid and did not effect dissolution.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 29
Parties
Pursuer: John Parker Maillie; Defenders: Robert Todd Swanney and Others
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Partnership Dispute / Preliminary Issue on Validity of Notice of Dissolution
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Partnership Dissolution, Interpretation of Partnership Agreements, Application of Partnership Act 1890, Notice of Dissolution, Contractual Construction
Commercial Law Partnership Law Partnership Dissolution Interpretation of Partnership Agreements Application of Partnership Act 1890 Notice of Dissolution Contractual Construction

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Parker Maillie

Pursuer

Robert Todd Swanney and Others

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil Partnership Dispute / Preliminary Issue on Validity of Notice of Dissolution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer was entitled to dissolve the partnership by notice under the terms of the partnership agreement as modified by deeds of assumption
  2. 2 Whether section 32(c) of the Partnership Act 1890 applied to permit dissolution by notice in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The partnership agreement, as modified by the deeds of assumption, provided an intelligible and exhaustive framework for the duration and termination of the partnership, permitting dissolution only by mutual agreement or in accordance with specified contractual provisions. Section 32(c) of the Partnership Act 1890 did not apply, and the pursuer was not entitled to dissolve the partnership by unilateral notice. The notice served by the pursuer was therefore invalid and did not effect dissolution.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • Sustained the first plea in law for the defenders
  • Dismissed the action