Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Module 3 Law On Partnership
Module 3 Law On Partnership
Module 3 Law On Partnership
MODULE 2
DISSOLUTION AND WINDING UP
LEARNING OUTCOMES
At the end of this module, you are expected to:
A. Define and comprehend the concepts of dissolution, winding up and
termination ;
B. Determine the rules on partnership after dissolution;
C. Differentiate the modes of winding up a partnership;
D. Discuss the concept of limited partnership; and
E. Enumerate and identify the different rights of the partners in a limited
partnership
LAW ON PARTNERSHIP
MODULE 2
Concept of Dissolution, Winding up and Termination
Dissolution is the change in the relation of the partners caused by any partner
ceasing to be associated in the carrying on of the business.
Winding up is the process of settling the business or affairs of the partnership after
dissolution
Termination refers to the point when all the business or affairs of the partnership are
completely wound up
Causes of Dissolution
2) of all the partners who have not assigned their interests or suffered
them to be charged for their separate debts, either before or after the
termination of any specified term or particular undertaking.
2. In contravention of the agreement between the partners by the express will of any
partner at any time.
3. When any event which makes it unlawful for the business of the partnership to be
carried on or for the members to carry it on in partnership.
LAW ON PARTNERSHIP
4. in the following cases of loss:
A. in any case by the loss of the thing, when the partner who contributed it having
reserved the ownership thereof; or
2. At any time if the partnership was a partnership at will when the interest
was assigned or when the charging order was issued.
LAW ON PARTNERSHIP
Rules on liability of the partners and partnership for acts of a partners after
dissolution.
1. If a partner’s authority is terminated among the partners (or such partner has no
authority to act) but the partnership is bound by the transaction.
A. the third person can go after the assets of the partnership.
B. if the assets of the partnership are not sufficient, the third person can go
after the separate assets of each partner.
C. thereafter, the other partners can go after the acting partner to recover
the amount they paid out of their separate assets and to demand the
return of the amount paid out of the partnership assets. This is so
because in so far as the partners are concerned, the authority of the
acting partner was already terminated.
2. If a partner’s authority is not terminated among the partners and the partnership
is bound by the transaction.
A. the third person can go after the assets of the partnership.
B. if the assets of the partnership are not sufficient, the third person can go
after the separate assets of each partner.
C. thereafter, the other partners cannot go after the acting partner for
recovery because after all the authority of the latter was not terminated
among all the partners. Here,, the partnership and the partners are liable
as if there had been no dissolution of the firm.
3. if a partner’s authority is terminated among the partners and the partnership is
not bound by the transaction.
A. the partnership assets cannot be held to answer for the liability to the
third person.
B. the acting partner alone is liable to the third person with whom he
contracted and he cannot call on the other partners to share in the
payment.
LAW ON PARTNERSHIP
4. if a partner’s authority is not terminated among the partners, but the partnership is
not bound by the transaction. This may occur for instance, when a partnership dis-
solved by reason of the death of a partner and the acting partner has no knowledge of
such death. Then such acting partner enters into a new transaction with a previous
creditor who had notice or knowledge of the dissolution of the partnership by reason
of such death.
Examples:
1. Madrid, Acosta, Platon, Lovina and Espina are partners in MAPLE enterprises which is
engaged in trading dry goods. Madrid is the manager. Espina dies. Madrid knows of
the death of Espina but he still purchases goods form Romero, a creditor who had
granted credit to MAPLE before dissolution. Romero was not aware of the dissolution
of the MAPLE enterprises by reason of death of Espina.
A. since Madrid knows of the death of Espina, then his authority is already
terminated among the partners.
B. with respect to Romero who is a previous creditor, since he was not specially
notified of the dissolution, MAPLE is bound by the purchase made by Madrid.
In this case, Romero can go after the assets of MAPLE. If MAPLE’s assets are not
sufficient, then he can go after the separate assets of all the partners, including
those of Espina. Thereafter, Acosta, Platon, Lovina and the legal representative
of Espina can go after Madrid for indemnity. This is so because among the
partners, Madrid’s authority to enter into a new transaction was terminated by
reason of his knowledge of the death of Espina.
2. in the above example, if madrid was not aware of the death of Espina, then his
authority was not yet terminated among the partners. Accordingly, he can call on his
partners and on Espina’s legal representative for the contribution from the partner’s
separate assets if MAPLE’s assets are not sufficient to pay the liability to Romero. The
partners shall be liable as if MAPLE has not been dissolved.
LAW ON PARTNERSHIP
3. With respect to No. 1, if Romero was specially notified of the dissolution, then only
Madrid will be liable to Romero. Madrid cannot call on the other partners and
Espina’s legal representative to share in the payment.
4. If there was no publication of the dissolution but Romero has not read it, Romero as a
previous creditor is deemed to be without notice or knowledge. Accordingly, MAPLE is
liable to Romero. If Romero is a new creditor, MAPLE will not be liable to him because
he is not entitled to a special attention. The mere publication of the dissolution of
MAPLE is sufficient notice to him.
2. A partner is discharged from any existing liability upon the dissolution of the
partnership by the agreement of the following:
A. the partner himself;
B. the partnership creditor; and
C. the person continuing the business.
such agreement may be inferred from the course of dealing
between the creditor having knowledge of the dissolution and the
person or partnership continuing the business.
3. The individual property of a deceased partner shall be liable for all obligations
of the partnership incurred while he was a partner, but subject to the prior
payment of his separate debts.
LAW ON PARTNERSHIP
Modes of Winding up Partnership Affairs
2. Judicially
Under the direction and control of the court, upon proper cause shown by
any partner, his legal representative or assignee.
The appointee of the court should be a surviving partner, not the legal
representative of the deceased partner who was not insolvent except when he
was the last surviving partner.
LAW ON PARTNERSHIP
Limited Partnership
A limited partnership is a partnership which has one or more general partners
and one or more limited partners. The limited partners as such shall not be bound by
the obligations of the partnership except up to the extent of their contribution.
2. Liabilities
A general partner shall be subject to all the restrictions and liabilities of
a partner in a partnership without limited partners.
2. Refer to the preceding number. What kind of partnership has been formed? Explain
your answer (10 points)
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________