Lord Parmoor :-

Their Lordships do not think it necessary to call on Counsel for the respondents. It is possible to state quite shortly what is the advice which they will feel called upon to tender to His Majesty in this case.

There was a partnership carried on between the defendant, who is the appellant, and one Mahomed Fazil. This partnership terminated on August 3rd 1915, on the death of Mahomed Fazil. Accounts had already been taken in this partnership up to some date in 1913, so that it was not necessary to reopen them. The order of the first Court was that a further account should be taken up to the date in 1915 at which Mahomed Fazil died; but for some reason no order was made for taking any subsequent accounts. It is clear that after Fazil's death the old business was continued, although it became a partnership at will.

This action was brought by the representatives of Fazil against the appellant in order that proper accounts might be taken. The Court of Appeal made an order :-

"that accounts be taken of the profits of the business since the death of Fazil on the 3rd August. 1915, up to the date when the final decree is made, all just allowance, including fair remuneration, to