The Partnership Act 1890 section 24 sets out rights of partners (in default of their own agreement). Which one of the following is not included in section 24? Group of answer choices The right to share equally in the capital and profits of the business. The right to be indemnified by the firm for any liabilities incurred or payments made in the course of the firm's business. The right to a salary The right to take part in the management of the business

The Partnership Act 1890 section 24 sets out rights of partners (in default of their own agreement). Which one of the following is not included in section 24? Group of answer choices The right to share equally in the capital and profits of the business. The right to be indemnified by the firm for any liabilities incurred or payments made in the course of the firm's business. The right to a salary The right to take part in the management of the business

Similar questions

SECTION D Read the following extract and then answer the question belowA client is interested in setting up a business and does not know which form of business to use. He has been told that he can form a sole proprietorship, or partnership, or a limited liability company. He comes seeking for business advises on the advantages and disadvantages of a registered company. Make a comparison between a sole proprietorship, partnership, and a limited liability company.
describing a Limited Liability Company (LLC) business that would created. Indicate a specific provisions that would be include in the LLC's Articles of Organization.
hi can i get help with these please?
Parker and Phillips incorporated P & P Resorts Inc., a closely held Texas corporation. Parker was president and Phillips served as vice president and director for operations. Parker owned 40% of the stock, while Phillips owned 60%. Both men met with CTA, a group of travel agents from California to discuss special deals for booking groups into the resorts. After the first meeting, all contracts with CTA were made by Phillips, who learned that there was a good chance that CTA would award the contract to P&P Resorts. Phillips incorporated Travel Brokers and was its sole owner. Phillips used P& P Resort’s time to work on proposals for Travel Brokers and managed to keep negotiations with CTA a secret from Parker. When Parker discovered Phillip’s actions, he filed suit against him for wrongfully taking a corporate opportunity from P &P Resorts. Phillips claimed that he did not take a corporate opportunity because Travel Brokers did not have the financial ability to…
Little Switzerland Brewing Company was incorporated on January 28. On February 18, Ellison and Oxley were made directors of the company after they purchased some stock. Then on September 25, Ellison and Oxley signed stock subscription agreements to purchase five thousand shares each. Under the agreement, they both issued a note that indicated that they would pay for the stock “at their discretion.” Two years later in March, the board of directors passed a resolution canceling the stock subscription agreements of Ellison and Oxley. The creditors of Little Switzerland brought suit against Ellison and Oxley to recover the money owed under the subscription agreements. Are Ellison and Oxley liable? Why or why not?
Discuss the legal responsibilities and liabilities of directors and officers in a corporation. What fiduciary duties do they owe to the company and its shareholders? What are the potential legal consequences for breaching these duties?
Describe the differences between a sole proprietorship, a partnership, and a corporation as business entities, including their advantages and disadvantages from a legal perspective.
Olav starts Power Cells to make and sell batteries. Later, Olav contracts with Quinn to invest additional capital in the firm in exchange for 25 percent of the profits. Olav and Quinn are not partners in Power Cells because
Wiener Haus #82 has been underperforming for a few years. The franchisee (owner of Haus #82) is frustrated and files a claim against the franchisor for breach. The franchisee claims that the agreement he signed contained a statement at the start of the agreement detailing that the business model the franchisor developed was "proven effective and profitable." On these facts, does the franchisee have a winning breach of contract claim against the franchisor? O No, the contract formed was a voidable contract. Thus, the franchisor is void of responsibility if the business model does not produce profit for the franchisee. O Yes, the franchisee relied on these statements when deciding to contract and thus the franchisor should be responsible when the business model fails to work for the franchisee. O No, courts have generally held that the type of language relied upon by the franchisee is "prefatory" and does not create a duty on the part of the franchisor. O Yes, the money paid to the…
Willams and Nick are childhood friends. Nick had lost his right hand in an accident in childhood. They meet after a long time in a restaurant. On being asked, Nick tells Willams that he feels very discontented in managing his family business after the death of his father as it doesn't match his areas of interest. Willams knows that Nick possesses extraordinary skills in management although he hasn't acquired any professional degree in management. Therefore, he asks Nick to wind up his business in India and join him in his hotel business in Dubai as an Assistant Manager in the Sales and Marketing Division. In the context of the above case: 1. Can Nick be deployed to the post of Assistant Manager in the Sales and Marketing Division though he hasn't acquired any professional degree in management? Explain by giving suitable justifications in support of your answer. 2. List any two values that are reflected in this act of Willams.
Which of the following statements is TRUE about an ultra vires transaction?Group of answer choices Its effect has been reduced under the Companies Act since it is no longer deemed an invalid transaction. Under common law, the transaction could be ratified by the company. Members, debenture holders (or their trustees) of the company cannot take an action to restrain such transactions under the Companies Act. Under common law, it was a voidable transaction hence the company could decide whether to continue with the transaction or not.
Palatka Costumes & Caps LLC ("PC & C") is a large props company formed in 1957, and Frodo Flags Corporation is a small, local flag manufacturer formed in 2015. These two businesses never had any dealings with each other until they recently entered into a contract, with terms all drafted by PC & C. The contract provides that PC & C shall purchase 1,000 flags that Frodo Flags will specially design for PC & C. The contract further provides that PC & C has the right to initiate, on a weekly basis, purchase orders of up to 100 flags until the contract's total number of flag purchases - 1,000 flags has been met. Also, the contract includes a clause stating that PC & C can cancel its obligation to pay for the remaining flags at any time if any Frodo Flags shipment does not arrive on the exact day as stated in a particular purchase order; this last provision is included in the contract even though time was of little importance to PC & C. W The first shipment of 100 flags arrives a day late,…