Business Contract
Question 1
The
contract that have been formed is partnership agreement because it involved two
parties. The contract was formed on 1 December 2016 when Mike and Elder Rower
signed the Terms Sheet. The parties in the contract are Mike and Elder Rower.
Question 2
Issues
Issue
1: Was Elder Rower still a partner in the Partnership agreement?
Issue
2: Was the act of Elder Rower of forming another business against the
partnership agreement?
Issue
3: Was Younger Rower entitled for dividend in the partnership?
Issue
4: Was the Elder Rower entitled for the dividend sent to him via the bank by
Mike despite he did not take part in the operation of the business?
Question 3
Analysis
Issue 1
Elder
Rower is not a partner because he started a new business competing their formed
partnership business at the market. The partnership laws, a partner stops to be
a partner if he or she starts a competing business to the business formed.
Issue 2
The
act Elder Rower of forming Snappy Talk business was against the partnership
agreement laws. The partnership Act outlines that a partner should not form a
competing business to the partnership formed. For that reason, the formation of
Snappy Talk was inconsistent with the partnership agreement Act.
Issue 3
Younger
Rower was not entitled for the dividend of the business because he was not a
partner in the business despite his effort of marketing and promoting the
business according to the Term Sheet signed by Mike and Elder Rower.
Issue 4
Elder
Rower was not entitled for the dividend sent to him via the bank because his
action of forming Snappy Talk business was against Partnership Act which
prohibit a partner from forming a competing business.
Question 4
Mike
should stop sending Elder Rower dividend from the success of the business. This
is because Elder Rower action of forming a competing business to the
partnership implies that he is no longer the partner in the business.
Reference
Boundy, C. (2016). Business Contracts
Handbook. CRC Press.
Business Contract
Question 1
The
contract that have been formed is partnership agreement because it involved two
parties. The contract was formed on 1 December 2016 when Mike and Elder Rower
signed the Terms Sheet. The parties in the contract are Mike and Elder Rower.
Question 2
Issues
Issue
1: Was Elder Rower still a partner in the Partnership agreement?
Issue
2: Was the act of Elder Rower of forming another business against the
partnership agreement?
Issue
3: Was Younger Rower entitled for dividend in the partnership?
Issue
4: Was the Elder Rower entitled for the dividend sent to him via the bank by
Mike despite he did not take part in the operation of the business?
Question 3
Analysis
Issue 1
Elder
Rower is not a partner because he started a new business competing their formed
partnership business at the market. The partnership laws, a partner stops to be
a partner if he or she starts a competing business to the business formed.
Issue 2
The
act Elder Rower of forming Snappy Talk business was against the partnership
agreement laws. The partnership Act outlines that a partner should not form a
competing business to the partnership formed. For that reason, the formation of
Snappy Talk was inconsistent with the partnership agreement Act.
Issue 3
Younger
Rower was not entitled for the dividend of the business because he was not a
partner in the business despite his effort of marketing and promoting the
business according to the Term Sheet signed by Mike and Elder Rower.
Issue 4
Elder
Rower was not entitled for the dividend sent to him via the bank because his
action of forming Snappy Talk business was against Partnership Act which
prohibit a partner from forming a competing business.
Question 4
Mike
should stop sending Elder Rower dividend from the success of the business. This
is because Elder Rower action of forming a competing business to the
partnership implies that he is no longer the partner in the business.
Reference
Boundy, C. (2016). Business Contracts
Handbook. CRC Press.
Business Contract
Question 1
The
contract that have been formed is partnership agreement because it involved two
parties. The contract was formed on 1 December 2016 when Mike and Elder Rower
signed the Terms Sheet. The parties in the contract are Mike and Elder Rower.
Question 2
Issues
Issue
1: Was Elder Rower still a partner in the Partnership agreement?
Issue
2: Was the act of Elder Rower of forming another business against the
partnership agreement?
Issue
3: Was Younger Rower entitled for dividend in the partnership?
Issue
4: Was the Elder Rower entitled for the dividend sent to him via the bank by
Mike despite he did not take part in the operation of the business?
Question 3
Analysis
Issue 1
Elder
Rower is not a partner because he started a new business competing their formed
partnership business at the market. The partnership laws, a partner stops to be
a partner if he or she starts a competing business to the business formed.
Issue 2
The
act Elder Rower of forming Snappy Talk business was against the partnership
agreement laws. The partnership Act outlines that a partner should not form a
competing business to the partnership formed. For that reason, the formation of
Snappy Talk was inconsistent with the partnership agreement Act.
Issue 3
Younger
Rower was not entitled for the dividend of the business because he was not a
partner in the business despite his effort of marketing and promoting the
business according to the Term Sheet signed by Mike and Elder Rower.
Issue 4
Elder
Rower was not entitled for the dividend sent to him via the bank because his
action of forming Snappy Talk business was against Partnership Act which
prohibit a partner from forming a competing business.
Question 4
Mike
should stop sending Elder Rower dividend from the success of the business. This
is because Elder Rower action of forming a competing business to the
partnership implies that he is no longer the partner in the business.
Reference
Boundy, C. (2016). Business Contracts
Handbook. CRC Press.
Business Contract
Question 1
The
contract that have been formed is partnership agreement because it involved two
parties. The contract was formed on 1 December 2016 when Mike and Elder Rower
signed the Terms Sheet. The parties in the contract are Mike and Elder Rower.
Question 2
Issues
Issue
1: Was Elder Rower still a partner in the Partnership agreement?
Issue
2: Was the act of Elder Rower of forming another business against the
partnership agreement?
Issue
3: Was Younger Rower entitled for dividend in the partnership?
Issue
4: Was the Elder Rower entitled for the dividend sent to him via the bank by
Mike despite he did not take part in the operation of the business?
Question 3
Analysis
Issue 1
Elder
Rower is not a partner because he started a new business competing their formed
partnership business at the market. The partnership laws, a partner stops to be
a partner if he or she starts a competing business to the business formed.
Issue 2
The
act Elder Rower of forming Snappy Talk business was against the partnership
agreement laws. The partnership Act outlines that a partner should not form a
competing business to the partnership formed. For that reason, the formation of
Snappy Talk was inconsistent with the partnership agreement Act.
Issue 3
Younger
Rower was not entitled for the dividend of the business because he was not a
partner in the business despite his effort of marketing and promoting the
business according to the Term Sheet signed by Mike and Elder Rower.
Issue 4
Elder
Rower was not entitled for the dividend sent to him via the bank because his
action of forming Snappy Talk business was against Partnership Act which
prohibit a partner from forming a competing business.
Question 4
Mike
should stop sending Elder Rower dividend from the success of the business. This
is because Elder Rower action of forming a competing business to the
partnership implies that he is no longer the partner in the business.
Reference
Boundy, C. (2016). Business Contracts
Handbook. CRC Press.
