![]() ![]() While the parties all expected to obtain something of value from the enterprise in that case, the Court observed that it was: The parties in Hayes did not meet the “business in common with a view to profit” test. requires the court to enquire into whether the conduct of the parties during the currency of their joint project constituted a partnership relationship notwithstanding their contrary intention and the provisions of their agreement ( Hayes at 123). Because there is no express contract in the present circumstances, a court would immediately turn to the second branch of the analysis, which was described as follows: A court will first review the agreement between the parties, then will look to the conduct of the parties ( ibid). The analysis used to discern the intention of the parties is two-pronged. ![]() The parties must intend a partnership to form ( Sproule v McConnell, 1 DLR 982 (Sask CA)). In determining whether a partnership has formed, the meaning of the words “carrying on business in common with a view of profit” should be considered ( ibid). on the general test for the existence of a partnership is that of Hayes v British Columbia Television Broadcasting System Ltd (1992), 74 BCLR (2d) 120 (CA). Here is a sample passage, illustrating how to provide in-text references: This makes later references much more succinct. ![]() Include the full citation to the case immediately after the relevant text. If you plan to refer to this case later, provide the reader with a short form in brackets. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |