Ho$,$ lo$,$ and Jo formed an ordinary partnership, called $30$ S$,$ some $5$ years ago.

Question $26$

Ho is a sleeping partner, whereas lo and Jo are active in the running of the business. Ho's liability for partnership debts was agreed between the partners to be limited to the amount of his capital contribution, $15,000.$

Which of the below best describes the liability of $Ho,$ lo$,$ and Jo for partnership debts?

A It is joint and several which means that several of the partners can be sued and since Ho is a sleeping partner he is not liable for any of the debts

B It is joint and several which means that all partners, excluding Ho$,$ have unlimited personal liability and could be sued and required to pay the full amount of all the debts

C It is joint and several which means that all partners, including Ho$,$ are responsible for a share of the partnership debts in the same proportion as they share out the profits

D It is joint and several which means that each and every partner, including Ho$,$ is fully liable without limit for all of the partnership debts and creditors can sue the partners simultaneously in one legal action or to choose to bring successive actions

Question $27$

Ho now retires from $30$S$.$ Prior to doing so Ho gave notice of his retirement to existing customers and advertised his retirement in the London Gazette.

After Ho's retirement lo entered into a contract on behalf of $30$S with Kay, a longstanding client of the firm. The contract has resulted in a debt of $13,600$ owed to Kay.

Which of the below best describes Ho's potential liability in relation to the debt owed to Kay?

A He is not liable for it as although Kay was an existing client at the time of his retirement, it was incurred afterwards and he was no longer a part of the business at that time

B He is not liable for it as although Kay was an existing client at the time of his retirement, it was incurred afterwards and he had already given notice of his retirement in the London Gazette

CHe is not liable for it as although Kay was an existing client at the time of his retirement, it was incurred afterwards and he had already given actual notice of his retirement to existing customers

D He is fully liable as the amount owed is less than the $15,000$ agreed to limit his liability

Question $28$

Also after Ho's retirement lo entered into a contract on behalf of $30$S with Laura, a new customer who has never read the London Gazette and believed that Ho was still a partner in the business. The contract with Laura incurred a debt of $16,000.$

Which of the below best describes Ho's potential liability in relation to the debt owed to Laura?

A He is not liable for it as Laura was not an existing client at the time of his retirement, it was incurred afterwards and he was no longer a part of the business at that time

B He is not liable for it as Laura was not an existing client at the time of his retirement, it was incurred afterwards and he had already given notice of his retirement in the London Gazette $C$ He is not liable for it as Laura was not an existing client at the time of his retirement, it was incurred afterwards and he had already given actual notice of his retirement to existing