Najim v De Mesa September 21, 1987| Limited Partnership Digester: Anna Mickaella Lingat SUMMARY: Lei De Mesa, !halid "a#im, and $ames %reenberg are partners &' the limited partnership (nternati&nal Skill Deel&pment )&* Ltd, engaged in the b+siness & ' lab&r recr+itment and placement '&r &erseas empl&ment* De Mesa is a general partner, -hile "a#im and %reenberg are limited partners* "a#im -r&te De Mesa a letter &' '&rmal n&tice &' his -ithdra-al 'r&m their partnership &n the alleged gr&+nd &' repeated 'ail+re &' De Mesa t& acc&+nt '&r his ma nagement &' the partnership* "a#im als& ca+sed the p+blicati&n in a ne-spaper and sent n&tice t& their clients &' the diss&l+ati&n &' the partnership* "a#im then .led a Petiti&n '&r Diss&l+ti&n -ith in#+ncti&n en#&ining De Mesa and %reenberg 'r&m c&ntin+ing -ith the b+siness* S/) held that the -ithdra-al &' limited partner "a#im did n&t diss&le the partnership* ")) &nl pr&ides that the -ithdra-al &' a general partner, partner, n&t a limited partner, &perates the diss&l+ti&n &' the partnership 0Art 183* 4he Articles &' Partnership als& pr&ides '&r the n&n5diss&l+ti&n and c&ntin+ati&n &' the b+siness* "a#im als& 'ailed t& pr&e his allegati&ns, -hile De Mesa -as able t& sh&- that "a#im has actiel participated in the b+siness* "a#im acted in bad 'aith in p+blishing in ne-spaper and n&ti'ing the clients &' the diss&l+ti&n &' the partnership pri&r t& his .ling &' the petiti&n '&r diss&l+ti&n -ith the S/)* DOCTRINE: 4he -ithdra-al &' a general partner, n&t a limited partner, partner, in a limited partnership, that &perates the diss&l+ti&n &' the partnership* 4he diss&l+ti&n can een b e preented, i' the b+siness &' the partnership is c&ntin+ed b the remaining general partners* 4here is n& pr&isi&n in ")) -hich pr&ides that a -ithdra-al &r retirement &' a limited partner6s shall diss&le a limited partnership* &-eer, there is a pr&isi&n -hich states that the retirement, death, ins&lenc, insanit, insanit, &r ciil interdicti&n &' a general partner diss&les the partnership, +nless the b+siness is c&ntin+ed b the remaining parties: 013 +nder a right s& t& d& stated in the certi.cate &r 023 ith the c&nsent &' all members, Art 18*
•
•
•
•
•
RULING: Petiti&n '&r diss&l+ti&n -ith in#+cti&n is dismissed '&r lack &r merit* "a#im is perpet+all en#&ined 'r&m ca+sing p+blicati&n and making representati&ns ab&+t the diss&l+ti&n &' the partnership* Whether the withdrawa !" imited #art$er Najim diss!ved the #art$ershi#% & NO Limited Partnerships are g&erned b pr&isi& ns &' the ")), )hapter , Arts* 18B t& 18 and the related C+les and Ceg+lati&ns &' the S/)* •
FACTS: Lei de Mesa registered a b +siness name +nder the stle (nternati&nal Skill Deel&pment )&* Ltd* 0Philippines3* •
De Mesa, t&gether -ith !halid "a#im and $ames %reenberg, '&rmed and &rgani;ed a limited partnership kn&-n as the (nternati&nal Skill Deel&ment )&* Ltd* +sing De Mesa, o Lei De Mesa ? P112,> !halid "a#im ? P18,7> $ames %reenberg ? P18,7> o De Mesa is the general partner, -hile "a#im and %reenberg are the limited partners* o Articles &' Partnership -as d+l registered -ith S/) o 4he partnership is engaged in the b+siness &' lab&r recr+itment and placement '&r &erseas empl&ment and has s+bsisting c&ntracts -ith '&reign clients d+l appr&ed and accredited b P@/A and D@L/* "a#im -r&te De Mesa a letter &' '&rmal n&tice &' his -ithdra-al 'r&m their partnership &n the alleged gr&+nd &' repeated 'ail+re &' De Mesa t& acc&+nt '&r his management &' the partnership* De Mesa replied and denied the acc+sati&n against him* "a#im iss+ed n&tice t& the p+blic thr&+gh a ne-spaper adertisement that the partnership has been diss&led* e als& sent letters t& client in'&rming them &' the alleged diss&l+ti&n* "a#im .led a Petiti&n '&r Diss&l+ti&n -ith a p raer '&r in#+ncti&n en#&ining De Mesa and %reenberg 'r&m c&ntin+ing -ith the partnership b+siness* De Mesa .led a petiti&n -ith S/) '&r the c&ntin+ati&n &' the partnership* e als& sent a letter t& S/) in'&rming it &' the -ithdra-al &' "a#im as a partner*
•
•
•
4here is n& pr&isi&n in ")) -hich pr&ides that a -ithdra-al &r retirement &' a limited partner6s shall diss&le a limited partnership* &-eer, there is a pr&isi&n -hich states that the retirement, death, ins&lenc, insanit, &r ciil interdicti&n &' a general partner diss&les the partnership, +nless the b+siness is c&ntin+ed b the remaining parties: 013 +nder a right s& t& d& stated in the certi.cate &r 02 3 ith the c&nsent &' all members, Art 18* 4here'&re, the -ithdra-al &' a general partner, n&t a limited partner, in a limited par tnership, that &perates the diss&l+ti&n &' the partnership* 4he diss&l+ti&n can een be preented, i' the b+siness &' the partnership is c&ntin+ed b the remaining general partners*
As applied in this case: 4he -ithdra-al &' "a#im, -h& is a l imited partner, did n&t diss&le the partnership, especiall d& that the remaining partners De Mesa and %reenberg ch&&se t& c&ntin+e the partnership* 4he n&n5diss&l+ti&n and c&ntin+ati&n &' the partnership b the remaining partners: De Mesa and %reenberg is, als& b+ttressed and a+th&ri;ed b the Articles &' Partnership &' (nternati&nal Skill Deel&pment )&* Ltd* +nder Article 9, -hich states: o AC4()L/ 9* 4hat i' d+ring the term &' the partnership, an &' the partners shall die, the partnership shall c&ntin+e am&ng the s+riing partners, +nless &ne &' the latter e=pressl reE+ests '&r diss&l+ti&n in -hich case the Articles shall be amended acc&rdingl* •
•
Whether a$ Ame$dme$t t! the Arti'es !" (art$ershi# "!r '!$ti$)ati!$ !" the *)si$ess !#erati!$s !" the said imited #art$ershi# *e a!wed t! *e re+istered% & YES 4he intenti&n &' the remaining partners, De Mesa and %reenberg, t& c&ntin+e -ith the limited partnership m+st be all&-ed b amending the Articles &' Partnership* 4he amendment certi.cate t& be .led -ith the S/) ma either be '&r the c&ntin+ati&n &' the said partnership b the remaining partners &r the additi&n &' an&ther limited partner &r general partner, -ith the c&nsent &' the &riginal partners, De Mesa and %reenberg 0Art 189 and 18>3 "a#im 'ailed t& s+bstantiate his claim that De Mesa 'ailed t& pr&perl acc&+nt '&r the management &' the partnership* @n the &ther hand, De Mesa e=plained in his testim&n that he has '+rnished "a#im -ith c&pies &' the E+arterl .nancial statements &' the partnership, and that "a#im actiel participated in the management &' the partnership and -as een a signat&r t& the checks that -ere iss+ed in the c&+rse &' its &perati&ns* "a#im acted in bad 'aith c&nsideri ng he 'act that he ca+sed the p+blicati&n in the ne-spaper &' n&tices &n the alleged diss&l+ti&n and n&tice t& the clients pri&r t& his .ling &' c&mplaint '&r diss&l+ti&n* is p+blicati&n that his -ithdra-al 'r&m the partnership has a+t&maticall diss&led the partnership, ca+sing tremend&+s damages t& b+siness &perati&ns and transacti&ns partic+larl abr&ad is +n-arranted* •
•
•
•
