(a) Wills and Kate were partners in two separate partnerships, “ABC & Co” and “XY&Z” (respectively). For years, Wills had got on well with his partners and performed well in his work, but with the onset of the corona virus, relationships between partners became stressed and profits declined. Despite these difficulties, Wills (although less profitable than usual) was by far the biggest earner of any partner in the business. Nonetheless, the other partners (Meghan and Harry) were determined that if one partner had to exit the flailing business, it would not be them. Meghan and Harry initiated steps to expel Wills and held a meeting at midnight (while Wills was on holidays for the Queen’s Birthday) to finalise his demise as a partner. Advise Wills on what recourse, if any, he might have. What further evidence would you need? Would your advice be clearer or stronger or different if evidence emerged that Wills was married to Boris, and Meghan and Harry were determined to turn “ABC & Co” into a Mecca for the anti-gay lobby? Parallel to that situation, Kate was having problems as a partner of “XY&Z”. Basically, Kate (who was also a director of Enigma Pty Ltd) had embezzled money from that company and laundered the funds through “XY&Z’s” bank accounts. Kate’s partner, Charles was extremely concerned by this behaviour as he recognised it as unlawful and questioned whether it could threaten the very existence of the business. He seeks your ad vice on that point. In the course of advising Charles, you stumble across the existence of Camilla, a director of Enigma Pty Ltd who is seeking advice from another lawyer as to whether Enigma can hold the partners of “XY&Z” liable for the embezzlement. On your reporting this to Charles, he seeks your advice on that question as well. Advise Charles.
