Talk:Partnership/Archive 1

Removal
Removed:
 * Stanley went to find Livingstone

It was listed under
 * Examples of personal partnerships:

but it should stay removed (unless it is verified they were secret lovers!): Stanley was a reporter in search of a story. He sent back gripping tales of East Africa, succeeded in picking up Livingstone's trail and, since they were strangers, wrote that he greeted him with "Dr. Livingstone, I presume", obviously the proper Victorian upper-class-twit greeting before introducing yourself to a complete stranger. --Jerzy(t) 16:37, 2004 Aug 20 (UTC)

Passive shareholder
Passive shareholder redirects here, can someone explain why? That explanation would also need to be worked into the article. --Bjarki 14:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Nominate contract
I don't see that there's much need to sdakeep brackets around the phrase "nominate contract". I doubt that could be worked up as a decent article -- at best, a dict def. Anybody agree? --Christofurio 20:41, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

general partnerships
The article states that general partners have "strict liability" to persons injured by the partnership. This may be true in some jurisdictions with respect to certain kinds of harm, but is not universally true. What is universally true (at least in common law countries) is that general partners have unlimited liability to recourse creditors of the partnership. See Black's Law Dictionary, definition of "general partner." 66.181.94.5 21:13, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Indian Partnership Act
This article can be improved by including the provisions of Indian Partnership Act, 1932 - Tamilmani.R 02.03.2007

Why is that link a "must read"
Has anyone actually looked at that link? It's garbage! Indiahowto.com? The URL should be the first tip off that such a citation is a joke, the second tip off is "must read."

Improvement
this article would be more advantageous,if rights n duties of partners mentioned seprately This article would be better if the article didn't just repeat specific laws, and instead kept with generalised sections, e.g.
 * What is a partnership
 * Who is a partner
 * Registration
 * Dynamics of a partnership
 * etc

And refering to laws in various countries, instead of interpretting specific laws. Any comments? --JB Adder | Talk 10:25, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I think that the partnership should cover the specific laws of Australia and other countries. That would make the article more enlightening. Can I include the specific provisions of Indian partnership Act 1932? Can any one provide their views?Tamilmani 05:06, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it would be brilliant to add information on the law from the Indian Partnership Act because this article as the Globalize tag, so we have to add more countries to this rather than just the UK and Australia (and now Hong Kong).EECavazos 17:53, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Organization
I recently divided the article into two sections, one for civil law and the other for common law. However, I kept the section heading for Australia and the UK until someone agrees to reorganize this article just a little. Australia and the UK have too much content for one article devoted to partnerships. Instead, I have created main articles for each of those countries, transferred the content to that article, and now await someone to summarize each country's law. As a template, I added a subsection on partnerships in Hong Kong where basically the introduction is the content body while a main article reference sends the reader to the article that contains more detailed information. The same approach I took to summarizing the law of Hong Kong can likewise be applied to the UK and Australia. I could summarize it, but I am much looser with adding and organizing than cutting out information.EECavazos 17:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

UK
The UK subsection needs more info on general partnerships and not just limited partnerships.EECavazos 23:00, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

USA
In the next few days I'll start working on partnership law in the USA. I'll use outside materials and information derived from articles in Uniform Partnership Act and Uniform Limited Partnership Act.EECavazos 18:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I filled in some, but now I think it may be possible to create a separate article for partnerships in the USA called Partnership (USA).EECavazos 04:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Link Keirestsu to Japanese Section??
Here's a suggestion for someone more "wikiliterate" than I am. Link the Japanese Keiretsu page > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keiretsu to this one. Again, just a suggestion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Evryedge (talk • contribs) 20:38, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Done. 66.168.11.0 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC).

Germany: GbR Missing
The Gesellschaft Bürgerlichen Rechts http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesellschaft_b%C3%BCrgerlichen_Rechts is missing in the artice. Ulrich (talk) 12:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Dead end redirect
"Sleeping partner" redirects here, but isn't mentioned in this article. Please put in some phrase with a definition. Thks. 99.11.160.111 (talk) 01:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

History
the article needs a section about the history of societates in Roman Law and in lex mercatoria (particularily in Genoa and Florence) and then about the India Companies, National Banks and other limited liability companies in early modern age. Lele giannoni (talk) 14:55, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Common law section
Added short section on Canadian partnerships (I might add more detail later) and alphabetized the jurisdictions. Bteed (talk) 20:31, 31 July 2012 (UTC)