the high court recently considered whether the signature of one partner (d) on loan agreements was enough to bind a general partnership, despite the execution blocks providing for the signature of both the partners (d and j). j argued that d did not have authority to bind the partnership to loan agreements entered into as (i) the signature blocks on the loan agreements had a section for the signatures of both partners (and it was not clear the capacity in which they were signing – as individuals or partners) and (ii) the bank mandate (which provided that only the signature of one partner was required to operate the bank account) was limited to everyday operations on account and did not extend to loans, so couldn’t be relied upon as authority for entry into the loan agreements.