1.

No. Creditors cannot be considered as partners. Under the law, it is not the mere sharing of profits
makes one a partner but the sharing of them as co-owners of the business or undertaking. at the case at
bar, the Thai and Co. merely agreed with the creditors to continue the business under the direction and
management of an experienced businessman until the claims of the creditors are satisfied due to the
insolvency of the company. Hence, this does not mean that the creditors are partners but a mere
remedy for the recovery of the Thai and Co.

2.

No. the firm is not liable. The law provides that, the partnership has juridical personality separate and
distinct from that each of the partners. At the case at bar, since Aminola voluntarily assumed
saidamen's debts to moin, the latter may demand payment to the former but the firm cannot be held
liable.

3.

No, the contention of Raisah's counsel is incorrect. Under the law, Conjugal partnership formed by the
marriage by virtue of which in common fund the fruits and income of their separate properties and
those acquired through their efforts unless agreed upon in the marriage settlements, divide equally
upon the dissolution of marriage. Furthermore, ordinary partnerships are governed by the stipulation of
the parties, whereas a conjugal partnership. Here, Alinader and Rhaisah signed an instrument declaring
Conjugal Partnership of Gains to govern their property relation. Hence, the dissolution of the spouse's
properties cannot be governed by the Law on Partnership.

Zacaria is correct. Under the law, contract of partnership is void whenever immovable property is
contributed, if an inventory of the said property is not made, signed by the parties and attached to the
public instrument. Here, though Mustapha donated the amount of P100,000.00, the parcel of land
contributed by Zacaria was not in the inventory and was not made and signed by the parties which
makes the partnership contract void and never existed. hence the contention of zacaria is correct.

5.

Yes the Intended partnership of atty. Jamellah and Atty Jamel is allowed. Under the law, the practice of a
profession is not a business or an enterprise for profit. However, the law allows the joint pursuit thereof
by two or more persons as partners.

6.
7.

No. The partnership is not dissolved. The law provides that, the conveyance of whole interest in a
partnership does not dissolve the partnership.

here, wata conveys his whole interes to babay with the consent and knowledge of the other partners.
Thus, the partnership is not dissolved.

8.

The Frim cannot be Liable. Under the law, As regards the liability of the partners, a partnership may be
general of limited. Here, aynon entered into contract with okboy with the knowledge of Aliah who
known to her that aynon is no longer in the partnership. Thus, okboy may only held Aliah and Aynopn
liable and not the partnership itself.