TRY ME!
Understanding Partnership Profit Sharing
Summary
Gross returns, not net profits, indicate a non-partnership as the landowner receives a fixed 50% without sharing expenses. Receiving a share of profits does not always imply a partnership, such as in debt repayment or employee wages. Partnerships must engage in legal activities. A void ab initio contract has no legal effect, rendering actions under it null and void.Full Conversation
The law specifically lists several instances where the receipt of a share of profits should not lead to the inference of a partnership:
SIMPLIFY
The law lists several instances where receiving a share of profits does not imply a partnership.
(a) As a debt by installments or otherwise: A creditor receiving a portion of the debtor's business profits as a way to repay a debt is not a partner. SIMPLIFY
Sure! Here's the simplified version:
A creditor getting a share of a debtor's business profits to repay a debt is not considered a partner.
A creditor getting a share of a debtor's business profits to repay a debt is not considered a partner.
(b) As wages of an employee or rent to a landlord: An employee compensated based on a percentage of the company's profits or a landlord receiving rent based on the tenant's business profits is not a partner.
SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
Sure! Here's the simplified version:
An employee paid a percentage of the company's profits or a landlord receiving rent based on the tenant's business profits is not considered a partner.
Sure! Here's the simplified version:
An employee paid a percentage of the company's profits or a landlord receiving rent based on the tenant's business profits is not considered a partner.
simplify: The business or undertaking that the partnership intends to engage in must be legal and not contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order, or public policy.
Case Rating: *
The partnership must engage in legal activities that adhere to laws, morals, good customs, public order, and public policy.
The partnership must engage in legal activities that adhere to laws, morals, good customs, public order, and public policy.
Since a void ab initio contract has no legal force or effect from its inception, any actions taken under the supposed authority of the "partnership" are generally considered null and void as well. simplofy
Case Rating: *
Sure! Here’s the simplified version:
A void ab initio contract has no legal effect from the start, so any actions under the "partnership" are generally null and void.
Sure! Here’s the simplified version:
A void ab initio contract has no legal effect from the start, so any actions under the "partnership" are generally null and void.
Why there are general partners in a limited partnership?
Case Rating: *
In a limited partnership, there are general partners because they manage the business and are personally liable for the partnership's debts. Limited partners invest capital and share profits but do not manage the business and have limited liability.
Is there anything specific you would like to know about limited partnerships?
In a limited partnership, there are general partners because they manage the business and are personally liable for the partnership's debts. Limited partners invest capital and share profits but do not manage the business and have limited liability.
Is there anything specific you would like to know about limited partnerships?
HOW ABOUT THE GENERAL PARTNERS IN A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, DO THEY NOT MANAGE THE PROPERTY OF THE PARTNERSHIP?
Case Rating: *
Yes, in a general partnership, the general partners manage the property and operations of the partnership. They have equal rights in the management and control of the business unless stated otherwise in the partnership agreement.
Is there anything else you need help with regarding partnerships?
Yes, in a general partnership, the general partners manage the property and operations of the partnership. They have equal rights in the management and control of the business unless stated otherwise in the partnership agreement.
Is there anything else you need help with regarding partnerships?
WHAT DIFFERS BETWEEN GENERAL PARTNER IN A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, AND GENERAL PARTNER IN A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP?
Case Rating: *
A general partner in a general partnership and a general partner in a limited partnership differ in the following ways:
- General Partnership: All partners share equal management rights and are fully liable for the partnership's debts.
- Limited Partnership: General partners manage the business and are fully liable for debts, while limited partners have limited liability and do not manage the business.
A general partner in a general partnership and a general partner in a limited partnership differ in the following ways:
- General Partnership: All partners share equal management rights and are fully liable for the partnership's debts.
- Limited Partnership: General partners manage the business and are fully liable for debts, while limited partners have limited liability and do not manage the business.
A general partnership is formed by an agreement entered into by each partner and should include the contributions of each partner, the distribution of profits or losses, and the terms for dissolution. If there is no written agreement, the profits and losses are presumed to be distributed equally. General partners have unlimited personal liability for all the business’s debts and liabilities, and any partner can commit the firm to obligations.
SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
A general partnership is formed by an agreement between partners, which includes contributions, profit/loss distribution, and dissolution terms. Without a written agreement, profits and losses are shared equally. General partners have unlimited personal liability and can bind the firm to obligations.
A general partnership is formed by an agreement between partners, which includes contributions, profit/loss distribution, and dissolution terms. Without a written agreement, profits and losses are shared equally. General partners have unlimited personal liability and can bind the firm to obligations.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN CAN BIND THE FIRM TO OBLIGATION?
Case Rating: *
In a general partnership, "binding the firm to obligations" means that any partner can enter into contracts or make decisions that legally commit the partnership. This means all partners are responsible for fulfilling these obligations, even if they were not directly involved in making the decision.
Do you have any other questions about partnerships or legal obligations?
In a general partnership, "binding the firm to obligations" means that any partner can enter into contracts or make decisions that legally commit the partnership. This means all partners are responsible for fulfilling these obligations, even if they were not directly involved in making the decision.
Do you have any other questions about partnerships or legal obligations?
A limited partnership is a partnership having one or more general partners and one or more limited partners. The limited partners have limited exposure to liability and are not involved in the day-to-day management of the limited partnership. simplify
Case Rating: *
A limited partnership has one or more general partners who manage the business and one or more limited partners with limited liability who do not manage the business.
A limited partnership has one or more general partners who manage the business and one or more limited partners with limited liability who do not manage the business.
Article *. Persons who are prohibited from giving each other any donation or advantage cannot enter into universal partnership. SHORTEN THIS TO MAKE A TITLE OF A TOPIC
Case Rating: *
Title: Prohibited Donations and Universal Partnerships
Title: Prohibited Donations and Universal Partnerships
"Every donation or promise between spouses during the marriage shall be void except moderate gifts which the spouses may give each other on the occasion of any family rejoicing (Art *, NCC) simplify
Case Rating: *
Donations or promises between spouses during marriage are void, except for moderate gifts given on special family occasions.
Donations or promises between spouses during marriage are void, except for moderate gifts given on special family occasions.
If spouses were allowed to enter into a universal partnership of all present property, it would circumvent the prohibition on donations between them during the marriage. It would allow them to transfer ownership of their individual properties to a common fund, achieving a result similar to a donation, which the law specifically forbids. SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
If spouses could enter a universal partnership of all present property, they could transfer individual properties to a common fund, similar to a donation, which the law forbids during marriage.
If spouses could enter a universal partnership of all present property, they could transfer individual properties to a common fund, similar to a donation, which the law forbids during marriage.
"A particular partnership has for its object determinate things, their use or fruits, or a specific undertaking, or the exercise of a profession or vocation." SIMPLIFY MAKE IT CLEAR
Case Rating: *
A particular partnership focuses on specific things, their use or benefits, a particular project, or a profession.
A particular partnership focuses on specific things, their use or benefits, a particular project, or a profession.
A particular partnership has a specific and defined purpose. Spouses are not prohibited from forming this type of partnership. For example, they could form a partnership to:
Manage a specific piece of real estate they jointly own (not contributing all present property).
Operate a specific business venture.
Engage in a particular profession together. SIMPLIFY MAKE IT CLEAR
Case Rating: *
Sure! Here's a clearer version:
A particular partnership has a specific purpose. Spouses can form this type of partnership to:
- Manage jointly-owned real estate.
- Operate a specific business.
- Engage in a profession together.
Sure! Here's a clearer version:
A particular partnership has a specific purpose. Spouses can form this type of partnership to:
- Manage jointly-owned real estate.
- Operate a specific business.
- Engage in a profession together.
Here's a summary of the rationale behind the prohibition of donations between spouses in the Philippines:
* **Protecting Spouses:** Prevents undue influence or coercion by one spouse over the other, especially the more vulnerable one.
* **Protecting Creditors:** Avoids spouses using donations to hide assets from creditors.
* **Maintaining Property Regimes:** Prevents spouses from circumventing the legal rules on how their property is owned and managed during marriage.
* **Avoiding Marital Disputes:** Reduces the potential for conflicts and instability in the marriage related to property transfers.
* **Preventing Abuse:** Addresses concerns about potential self-interest or manipulation in donations between spouses.
* **Protecting Inheritance Rights:** Prevents the use of donations to bypass inheritance laws.
SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
Here’s a simplified summary of the rationale behind the prohibition of donations between spouses in the Philippines:
- Protecting Spouses: Prevents undue influence or coercion.
- Protecting Creditors: Avoids hiding assets.
- Maintaining Property Regimes: Ensures legal property management.
- Avoiding Marital Disputes: Reduces conflicts over property.
- Preventing Abuse: Addresses self-interest or manipulation concerns.
- Protecting Inheritance Rights: Prevents bypassing inheritance laws.
Is there anything specific you would like to know about this topic?
Here’s a simplified summary of the rationale behind the prohibition of donations between spouses in the Philippines:
- Protecting Spouses: Prevents undue influence or coercion.
- Protecting Creditors: Avoids hiding assets.
- Maintaining Property Regimes: Ensures legal property management.
- Avoiding Marital Disputes: Reduces conflicts over property.
- Preventing Abuse: Addresses self-interest or manipulation concerns.
- Protecting Inheritance Rights: Prevents bypassing inheritance laws.
Is there anything specific you would like to know about this topic?
he prohibition under Article * of the Family Code applies to donations made by one spouse directly to the other spouse.
It does not generally prohibit a spouse from making donations to other individuals or entities (like children, relatives, friends, or charitable organizations) using their own separate property. However, there might be limitations or considerations depending on the specific property regime of the spouses (e.g., community property) and whether the donation could be considered prejudicial to the other spouse's share or the family's well-being. simplify with clear legal basis
Case Rating: *
Article * of the Family Code prohibits spouses from making donations directly to each other during marriage, except for moderate gifts on special family occasions. However, spouses can donate to others (like children, relatives, or charities) using their separate property, unless it affects the other spouse's share or the family's well-being.
Article * of the Family Code prohibits spouses from making donations directly to each other during marriage, except for moderate gifts on special family occasions. However, spouses can donate to others (like children, relatives, or charities) using their separate property, unless it affects the other spouse's share or the family's well-being.
MEANING IT IS NOT THE REGISTRATION THAT CONFER LIFE TO PARTNERSHIP BUT THE FROM THE FORMATION OF THE PARTNERSHIP? rephrase legal english
Case Rating: *
It is the formation, not the registration, that gives life to a partnership.
It is the formation, not the registration, that gives life to a partnership.
It is the formation, not the registration, that gives life to a partnership. CONVERT THIS TO AN INNOCENT QUESTION
Case Rating: *
Does the formation of a partnership create its existence, rather than its registration?
Does the formation of a partnership create its existence, rather than its registration?
rticle * clearly indicates that the legal existence of a partnership begins from the moment the contract of partnership is perfected, which occurs when the partners' minds meet on the essential terms of their agreement. This is the point of formation of the partnership. SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
A partnership legally exists from the moment the partners agree on the essential terms of their partnership contract.
A partnership legally exists from the moment the partners agree on the essential terms of their partnership contract.
Article * (Separate Juridical Personality): While Article * grants a partnership a separate juridical personality, it doesn't state that this personality is contingent upon registration. It simply declares that the partnership has this separate existence from the partners themselves.
Article * (Registration Requirement): Article * requires registration with the SEC for partnerships with a capital of ₱*,* or more. However, the second paragraph explicitly states:
"Failure to comply with the requirements of the preceding paragraph shall not affect the liability of the partnership and the members thereof to third persons."
This implies that the partnership exists and can incur liabilities even without registration. Registration is more for public information and certain legal effects regarding third parties, not for the very creation of the partnership's legal existence inter se (among the partners) SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
Article * (Separate Juridical Personality): A partnership has a separate existence from its partners, not dependent on registration.
Article * (Registration Requirement): Partnerships with a capital of ₱*,* or more must register with the SEC. However, non-registration doesn't affect the partnership's liability to third parties. Registration is mainly for public information and legal effects regarding third parties, not for the partnership's creation.
Article * (Separate Juridical Personality): A partnership has a separate existence from its partners, not dependent on registration.
Article * (Registration Requirement): Partnerships with a capital of ₱*,* or more must register with the SEC. However, non-registration doesn't affect the partnership's liability to third parties. Registration is mainly for public information and legal effects regarding third parties, not for the partnership's creation.
By that premise, does an oral partnership can possibly exist? repharse
Case Rating: *
Can an oral partnership exist based on that premise?
Can an oral partnership exist based on that premise?
Exception for Immovable Property (Article *): While a public instrument is required when immovable property or real rights are contributed, this is a requirement for the form of the contract to be valid in that specific instance, not necessarily for the partnership's existence against third parties (though it affects its validity between the partners). simplify
Case Rating: *
Simplified:
Article *: A public document is needed for contributions of immovable property or real rights for the contract to be valid, but this does not affect the partnership's existence against third parties, only its validity between partners.
Article *: A public document is needed for contributions of immovable property or real rights for the contract to be valid, but this does not affect the partnership's existence against third parties, only its validity between partners.
THEREFORE, IF THE CONTRIBUTION IS NOT VALID, NO PARTNERSHIP IS FORMED? rephrase transform this to a question
Case Rating: *
If the contribution is not valid, is no partnership formed?
If the contribution is not valid, is no partnership formed?
The contributing partner is also liable for the fruits (income or benefits) of the promised contribution from the time it should have been delivered, even without a formal demand.
simplify
Case Rating: *
The contributing partner is responsible for the income or benefits of the promised contribution from the time it was due, even without a formal demand.
The contributing partner is responsible for the income or benefits of the promised contribution from the time it was due, even without a formal demand.
The contributing partner is responsible for the income or benefits of the promised contribution from the time it should be delivered, even without a formal demand. correct grammar?
Case Rating: *
Yes, the grammar is correct. Here is a slightly refined version for clarity:
"The contributing partner is responsible for the income or benefits of the promised contribution from the time it should be delivered, even without a formal demand."
Yes, the grammar is correct. Here is a slightly refined version for clarity:
"The contributing partner is responsible for the income or benefits of the promised contribution from the time it should be delivered, even without a formal demand."
If the industrial partner engages in a business that is entirely different in nature and does not pose any competition to the partnership, this prohibition in Article * would generally not apply. They would be free to pursue that separate venture without automatically facing exclusion or having to surrender the profits to the partnership. Example: If the partnership is a restaurant, the industrial partner (the chef) cannot open their own separate restaurant without permission. However, they would likely be allowed to invest in a completely unrelated business, such as a bookstore, without violating Article *
SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
If the industrial partner's new business is different and not competitive with the partnership, Article *’s prohibition doesn’t apply. They can pursue the new venture without facing exclusion or surrendering profits to the partnership. For example, a restaurant chef can invest in a bookstore without violating Article *.
If the industrial partner's new business is different and not competitive with the partnership, Article *’s prohibition doesn’t apply. They can pursue the new venture without facing exclusion or surrendering profits to the partnership. For example, a restaurant chef can invest in a bookstore without violating Article *.
In Article *, "equal shares" refers to the proportion in which the partners will share in the profits and losses of the partnership, not necessarily the amount, or value of their initial capital contributions. The article establishes a presumption: unless the partners agree otherwise in their partnership agreement, the default rule is that they will share profits and losses equally, regardless of whether their initial contributions to the capital were of equal value. SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
In Article *, "equal shares" means partners share profits and losses equally, regardless of their initial contributions. The default rule applies unless stated otherwise in the partnership agreement.
Do you have any other questions regarding partnerships?
In Article *, "equal shares" means partners share profits and losses equally, regardless of their initial contributions. The default rule applies unless stated otherwise in the partnership agreement.
Do you have any other questions regarding partnerships?
Article *: Obligation to Contribute Additional Capital to Avert Imminent Loss - In case of an imminent loss threatening the partnership business, any capitalist partner who refuses to contribute an additional share to the capital to save the venture (except an industrial partner who contributes only labor) can be compelled to sell their interest to the other partners.simplify
Case Rating: *
In case of imminent loss, a capitalist partner who refuses to contribute additional capital to save the partnership can be forced to sell their interest to the other partners, except for an industrial partner who only contributes labor.
Would you like to ask any further questions regarding partnerships or any other legal issues?
In case of imminent loss, a capitalist partner who refuses to contribute additional capital to save the partnership can be forced to sell their interest to the other partners, except for an industrial partner who only contributes labor.
Would you like to ask any further questions regarding partnerships or any other legal issues?
Article *: Application of Collections from a Common Debtor - If a managing partner collects a demandable sum owed to them personally from a person who also owes the partnership another demandable sum, the amount collected is applied proportionally to both credits. However, if the receipt specifically indicates it was for the partnership credit, the entire amount is applied to that credit.
Exception: This rule does not prejudice the debtor's right to choose which debt to pay first (under Article *), but only if the partner's personal credit is more onerous to the debtor.
SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
If a managing partner collects money from a debtor who owes both the partner and the partnership, the amount is divided proportionally. If the receipt specifies it’s for the partnership, the entire amount goes to the partnership. The debtor can choose which debt to pay first if the partner's debt is more burdensome.
Would you like to know more about this topic or have any questions?
If a managing partner collects money from a debtor who owes both the partner and the partnership, the amount is divided proportionally. If the receipt specifies it’s for the partnership, the entire amount goes to the partnership. The debtor can choose which debt to pay first if the partner's debt is more burdensome.
Would you like to know more about this topic or have any questions?
what is the recourse of the other partner or partnership, if one of the partners applied to his personal account the amount collected
Case Rating: *
If a partner applies the amount collected to their personal account instead of the partnership, the other partners or the partnership have the following recourse:
- Demand Accounting: Request an accounting of the partnership's finances.
- Legal Action: File a legal complaint for breach of fiduciary duty and demand restitution.
- Expel the Partner: If the partnership agreement allows, expel the partner for misconduct.
Would you like more detailed information on any of these options?
If a partner applies the amount collected to their personal account instead of the partnership, the other partners or the partnership have the following recourse:
- Demand Accounting: Request an accounting of the partnership's finances.
- Legal Action: File a legal complaint for breach of fiduciary duty and demand restitution.
- Expel the Partner: If the partnership agreement allows, expel the partner for misconduct.
Would you like more detailed information on any of these options?
*. We must Visible, places of convergence
*. Reporting system
*. Filing of cases, lets do away with fall guys
*. if there is a shooting incident, COPs as much as possible COP is
with investigator in the field
*. Violent crimes immediately informed the Command Group
*. Strengthen patrol activities
*. Focused on illegal drugs operations
*. Target setting of OPLAN especially manhunt Charlie
*. Strengthen counter intelligence efforT
Case Rating: *
Hi there! It looks like you have a list of points related to law enforcement and crime prevention procedures. Are you seeking legal information or clarification on any specific point from this list?
Hi there! It looks like you have a list of points related to law enforcement and crime prevention procedures. Are you seeking legal information or clarification on any specific point from this list?
*. We must Visible, places of convergence
*. Reporting system
*. Filing of cases, lets do away with fall guys
*. if there is a shooting incident, COPs as much as possible COP is
with investigator in the field
*. Violent crimes immediately informed the Command Group
*. Strengthen patrol activities
*. Focused on illegal drugs operations
*. Target setting of OPLAN especially manhunt Charlie
*. Strengthen counter intelligence effort
IMPROVED IDEAS
Case Rating: *
Hi! It seems like you have some ideas for improving law enforcement procedures. Are you looking for specific legal information or advice on how to implement these ideas?
Hi! It seems like you have some ideas for improving law enforcement procedures. Are you looking for specific legal information or advice on how to implement these ideas?
*. We must Visible, places of convergence
*. Reporting system
*. Filing of cases, lets do away with fall guys
*. if there is a shooting incident, COPs as much as possible COP is
with investigator in the field
*. Violent crimes immediately informed the Command Group
*. Strengthen patrol activities
*. Focused on illegal drugs operations
*. Target setting of OPLAN especially manhunt Charlie
*. Strengthen counter intelligence effort
THIS IS TOPIC DISCUSSED DURING CONFERENCE, PLEASE IMPROVED IDEAS
Case Rating: *
Here are some improved ideas based on your conference topics:
*. Increase visibility in high-traffic areas.
*. Develop an efficient reporting system.
*. Ensure accountability in case filings, avoiding scapegoats.
*. Ensure COPs accompany investigators during shooting incidents.
*. Notify the Command Group immediately about violent crimes.
*. Enhance patrol operations.
*. Intensify operations against illegal drugs.
*. Set clear targets for OPLAN, especially for Manhunt Charlie.
*. Strengthen counter-intelligence efforts.
Would you like more detailed information on any of these points?
Here are some improved ideas based on your conference topics:
*. Increase visibility in high-traffic areas.
*. Develop an efficient reporting system.
*. Ensure accountability in case filings, avoiding scapegoats.
*. Ensure COPs accompany investigators during shooting incidents.
*. Notify the Command Group immediately about violent crimes.
*. Enhance patrol operations.
*. Intensify operations against illegal drugs.
*. Set clear targets for OPLAN, especially for Manhunt Charlie.
*. Strengthen counter-intelligence efforts.
Would you like more detailed information on any of these points?
if am suspect of a particular shooting incident, an official report of the police about my arrest was posted in social media. Do I have legal recourse to protect my privacy rights and presumption of innocence?
Case Rating: *
You may have legal recourse under Philippine law to protect your privacy rights and presumption of innocence. Here are some points to consider:
- Privacy Violation: Article * of the Civil Code of the Philippines protects individuals from offensive and unjustifiable acts of privacy invasion.
- Presumption of Innocence: The * Philippine Constitution guarantees the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
Would you like more information on legal actions you can take?
You may have legal recourse under Philippine law to protect your privacy rights and presumption of innocence. Here are some points to consider:
- Privacy Violation: Article * of the Civil Code of the Philippines protects individuals from offensive and unjustifiable acts of privacy invasion.
- Presumption of Innocence: The * Philippine Constitution guarantees the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
Would you like more information on legal actions you can take?
If a partnership debtor makes a payment directly to a partner, and the payment is in the exact amount representing his interest in the partnership credit, and the debtor later becomes insolvent and is no longer able to pay the other partners, the partner who received his share is legally obligated to bring it back to the partnership. simplify with legal english
Case Rating: *
If a partnership debtor pays a partner directly an amount equal to that partner's share, and the debtor later becomes insolvent and can't pay the other partners, the partner who received the payment must return it to the partnership.
If a partnership debtor pays a partner directly an amount equal to that partner's share, and the debtor later becomes insolvent and can't pay the other partners, the partner who received the payment must return it to the partnership.
A partner who has received their share of a partnership credit while other partners have not, is obligated to bring that amount back to the partnership capital if the debtor subsequently becomes insolvent. This applies even if the partner gave a receipt only for their share. SIMPLIFY
Case Rating: *
If a partner receives their share of partnership credit while others haven't and the debtor becomes insolvent, they must return the amount to the partnership. This obligation holds even if they only gave a receipt for their share.
If a partner receives their share of partnership credit while others haven't and the debtor becomes insolvent, they must return the amount to the partnership. This obligation holds even if they only gave a receipt for their share.
Start a new chat