As a follow up to my recent blog post about limited partnerships (what they are, how to create one, partnership name, etc.), I thought Iâ€™d follow up with an article about how limited partners can LOSE THEIR LIABILITY STATUS!!! Remember: Iâ€™m only dealing with Ontario limited partnerships. You should check out your regional legislation dealing with limited partnerships and the case law that interprets that legislation. Also, be sure to get a lawyer to update you on any new legislation or cases that impact limited partnerships.
So we start off with the idea that limited partners are generally liable only to the extent of their contribution. Their contribution must be stated in the records of the limited partnership and such records must be kept at the limited partnershipâ€™s principal place of business in Ontario: s. 4.
Limited partners have a number of rights in the limited partnership (same as general partner) under the Ontario Limited Partnerships Act, including:
Now hereâ€™s the kicker: (as previously blogged about) if the surname or a distinctive part of a corporate name of a limited partner is used in the limited partnershipâ€™s name, then â€œthe limited partner is liable as a general partner to any creditor of the limited partnership who has extended credit without actual knowledge that the limited partner is not a general partnerâ€: s. 6(2) of the Ontario Limited Partnerships Act.
Even more importantly: if a limited partners â€œtakes part in the control of the businessâ€ of the limited partnership, then they shall be fixed with the same UNLIMITED LIABILITY as a general partner: s. 13(1). Keep in mind that a limited partner, simply by exercising their other rights and powers granted to them under the Act (i.e. above), will not assume the liability of a general partner. Such liability only attaches to them exercising control beyond the scope of what they are allowed to under the Act.
So what have the Ontario courts said about this whole â€œtakes part in the control of the businessâ€ situation?
Well, at present, the leading case in Ontario is Haughton Graphic Ltd. v. Zivot,33 B.L.R. 125 (Ont. H.C.J.), affâ€™d 38 B.L.R. xxxiii (Ont. C.A.), leave to appeal denied 38 B.L.R. xxxiii (S.C.C.). Here are the facts of the case:
So the question in that case came up: should the limited partners â€“ in their personal capacity â€“ be held liable for debts owed by the limited partnership on the basis that they took part in the control of the business? The court was looking at Alberta laws of limited partnership, which were akin to s. 13 of the Ontario Limited Partnerships Act.
The Ontario High Court of Justice essentially said: â€œYes, theyâ€™re liableâ€. Eberle J. said that the defendants were â€œin complete control of the limited partnershipâ€: one defendant was the directing mind of the limited partnership, was responsible for it, and managed it. He signed cheques on behalf of the limited partnership (the other defendant had authority to do so). The fact that they were both employees of the general partner did not save them.
Whatâ€™s also important in this case is that the Court rejected the defendantâ€™s arguments that they shouldnâ€™t be liable on the basis that the printing company knew it was dealing with a limited partnership. The idea here is that a limited partner who takes part in controlling the business shouldnâ€™t be liable if the creditor believes that the limited partner was a general partner. But the court rejected that argument. Eberle J. stated that that: â€œIf reliance was a necessary precondition to unlimited liability for a limited partner, appropriate words should be in the statuteâ€.So whatâ€™s the moral of the story? Be cautioned: if youâ€™re both a limited partner and an officer or director of a general partner, your liability will be unlimited if you take part in the control of the business â€“ even if you claim you did so in your capacity as an officer or director of a general partner and not as a limited partner!
|Name: Michael Carabash