Lynch v Stiff [1943] HCA 38

Appl Wile Group Pyke Group Lady Pilmer id (in tig 3)

Pih

428 HIGH COURT (1943.

{HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.]

LYNCH . : i i 3 5 : : . APPELLANT ; DEFENDANT, AND SIDE ; : f : : 5 i . ResPpoNnDENT. PLAINTIFF,

ON APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES.

H.C. or A. Partnership—Holding out as partner—Credit given on faith of representation—

1943. Necessity to show that credit would not have been given apart from representation GP —Partnership Act 1892 (N.S.W.) (55 Viet. No. 12), 8. 14 (1). SyDNry,

In order to render a person liable under s. 14 (1) of the Partnership Act 1892

Dec. 6, 8. 5 dd esis (N.S.W.) as a partner by holding out it is not necessary for the person who nan CS., has given credit to the firm on the faith of the representation to show that, MeTiernan_and apart from the holding out, he would not have given credit. Williams JJ.

Decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales (Full Court), affirmed.

Apprat from the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

In an action brought in the Supreme Court of New South Wales and tried as a commercial cause without a jury, the plaintiff, Edward Stiff, claimed that one John Williamson, a solicitor, had received moneys of the plaintiff for which he had failed to account, and that the defendants, Thomas Davis Lynch and Benjamin Melville Salmon, were liable to pay these moneys to him because at all relevant times they were, or had held themselves out to him to be, partners of the said John Williamson in the transaction of the business in connection. with which the moneys had been received by Williamson.

The said John Williamson, who in 1940 was convicted of fraudulent misappropriation of money and was struck off the roll of solicitors, had since 1931 been carrying on the business of a solicitor under the name of John Williamson and Sons, and the evidence showed that for at least sixty years a firm under that name had carried on