Not in the view of either that what would be obtained would be the profit of the business being carried on in common. 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 kommentar(er)
