KALMONI vs. TACKIE [1961]DLHC5401

Date	1961-06-30
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1961]DLHC5401

OLLENNU J.

J. B. QUASHIE-IDUN (WITH HIM E. N. P. SOWAH) FOR THE PLAINTIFF.

A. CASELY-HAYFORD FOR THE DEFENDANT.

[1961]DLHC5401
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">KALMONI <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">TACKIE<o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;
mso-fareast-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#548DD4">&nbsp;[HIGH COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

J.
B. QUASHIE-IDUN (WITH HIM E. N. P. SOWAH) FOR THE PLAINTIFF.<o:p></o:p>

A.
CASELY-HAYFORD FOR THE DEFENDANT.<o:p></o:p>

</div>CORAM: <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid black 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

OLLENNU J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF
OLLENNU J.<o:p></o:p>The plaintiff and the defendant are wife and husband married in
accordance with Islamic law. By an agreement dated the 1st December, 1958, they
formed a partnership trading under the name and style of Express Grocery.
Differences have arisen between them, and they are now living apart. The
plaintiff, being dissatisfied with the management of the business and the
manner in which she alleged the defendant applied the profits from the business
which should come to her, felt compelled to call for accounts and to request
dissolution of the partnership. She has now sued claiming dissolution of the
partnership and an order for payment to her of any amount which may be found
due to her upon the accounts.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The accounts have been taken by consent of both parties and the
amount due to either party has been agreed by them or their counsel. But the
defendant resisted the claim for dissolution on two main grounds, namely, (i)
that according to the partnership agreement exhibit A, the only condition upon
which the partnership could be dissolved is the death of one of the partners,
and (ii) that the fact that the partners are husband and wife shows that the
intention of the parties is that the partnership shall continue indefinitely
and cannot be dissolved so long as the two partners are both alive.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>This submission is untenable. Where no fixed term has been agreed
upon for duration of a partnership, the partnership is a partnership at will,
and may be determined at any time by one partner giving notice of his intention
so to do to the other partner or partners: see Lindley on Partnership (11th
ed.), page 179. Moreover a court may dissolve a partnership upon the
application of any partner on any one of six different grounds, the sixth
being: “Where any circumstances have arisen which in the opinion of the Court,
make it just and equitable that the partnership be dissolved”. (See Lindley on
Partnership, (11th ed.), pages 673-4; and also Underhill on Partnership, (6th
ed.), page 112).<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The most important element in partnership is the willingness of
the parties to work together or pool their resources together, financial or
otherwise, in doing business. That willingness to work together or pool
resources together to operate a business is based upon mutual trust and
confidence. The moment that mutual trust or confidence is lost, the main
foundations of the partnership are gone. In such circumstances it is only just
and equitable that the court should decree dissolution of the partnership.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In my opinion that is exactly the situation in this case. Rightly
or wrongly, the plaintiff has come to feel that the defendant is misusing the
share of the profits which should come to her, and is taking undue advantage of
her. She no longer trusts the defendant and will not continue in partnership with
him. She is very firm in her determination that the partnership should not
continue. In such a case it is the duty of the court to decree a dissolution of
the partnership, and make an order for distribution of the assets of the
partnership in the proportion set out in the partnership agreement; in this
case in the proportion of 25 per cent and 75 per cent as provided in exhibit A.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>