42.Question 42Peter and Michelle are recent business school graduates with very few resources. They decided to start a business as partners. Michelle was a much better negotiator than Peter (because she had taken a MOOC called “Successful Negotiation”!). She persuaded Peter to sign a partnership agreement that was extremely unfair to him. He should be able to back out of the agreement because (select one):1 pointMichelle committed fraud.the agreement is unconscionable.Michelle breached the anchoring rule.all of the above.two of the above.none of the above.

Which case discussed the following legal principle: ‘The need for a binding contract between the partners to conduct the business together is fundamental to a partnership relationship.’?Group of answer choicesWarner Capital Pty Ltd v Shazbot Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCA 121Manley v Sartor [1927] Ch 157Cameron v Hogan (1934) 51 CLR 358McKinnon v Grogan [1974] 1 NSWLR 295

Jack, Samantha and Michelle are partners in a business. Jack contributed $40,000 to the partnership, while Samantha and Michelle contributed $10,000 each to the business. The partnership agreement is silent on the manner in which profit and losses in the business are to be distributed. In 2020, the partnership made a profit of $60,000. The partners will share the profit in which of the following ways?Group of answer choicesJack will receive $40,000 of the profit. Samantha and Michelle will each receive $10,000 of the profitJack, Samantha and Michelle will each receive $20,000 of the profitJack will receive $30,000 of the profit. Samantha and Michelle will each receive 15,000 of the profitJack and Samantha will each receive $10,000 of the profit and Michelle will receive $40,000

Rebecca and Simon run a restaurant in partnership. There is no written partnership agreement guiding their activities. Which amongst the following statements is CORRECT? Select one: a. The Partnership Act 1958 (Vic)'s provisions are not applicable to Rebecca and Simon since there is no written partnership agreement between them. b. The Partnership Act 1958 (Vic)'s provisions will apply to govern the relationship in relation to matters that have not been agreed orally between Rebecca and Simon. c. The Partnership Act 1958 (Vic)'s provisions will only apply when the parties agree to be covered by that Act in writing or orally. d. The Partnership Act 1958 (Vic)'s provisions relating to the rights and obligations of the partners towards each other take priority over anything agreed orally between Rebecca and Simon.

The partnership is terminated upon dissolution thereof.Group of answer choicesTrueFalse

In which of the following circumstances will the rest of the partners NOT be liable for the conduct of a partner?Group of answer choicesA partner enters into a contract on behalf of the partnership, which is not expressly required by the partnership agreement, yet is within the scope of the firm’s normal businessAn outsider entered into a series of agreements with a partner in the name of the partnership. The other partners have no knowledge of this partner’s actions and the partner did not have the authority to enter into the agreements. However, the type of agreements entered into could be considered by an outsider to be of a type that such a firm would legitimately have enteredWhile acting within the scope of his/her apparent authority, a partner advises a client of the partnership to invest in a company which the partner knows is a mere shell company. This shell company has no shares, has no bank account and does not engage in business. The client followed the advice of the partner and invested as instructed. The client loses all of his money when the same partner takes the money and goes into hiding. The client seeks compensation in tort from the remaining partnersA partner, who is also a trustee of the firm, improperly employs trust property on account of the partnership without the knowledge of the other partners