8/13/2019 Doctrines in Partnership Law
1/2
JURISPRUDENCE
BASTIDA vs. MENZI
*articles of association by which 2 or more persons obligate
themselves toplace in a common fund any property, industry, or any
of these things, in order toobtain profit, shall be COMMERCI!
BORJA vs. ADDISON
*a surviving husband may form a partnership with the heirs of
the deceased
wife for the management and control of the community
property
"#$ in the absence of the formalities prescribed by the Civil
Code, %nowledgeof the e&istence of the new partnership or
community of property must at leastbe brought home to third persons
dealing with the surviving husband in regard tothe community real
property in order to bind them by the community agreement
KIEL vs. SABERT
*the declarations of one partner, not made in the presence of
his co'partner,
are not competent to prove the e&istence of a partnership
between them asagainst such partner
*the e&istence of a partnership cannot be established by
general reputation,
rumor or hearsay
EVENGELISTA vs. C.I.R.
* "y the contract of partnership 2 or more persons bind
themselves tocontribute money, property, or industry to a common
fund, with the intention ofdividing the profits among
themselves
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS of a PARTNERSHIP() an agreement to CO$RI"#$E
money, property, or industry to a COMMO
+#2) intent to divide the profits among the contracting
parties
*when our internal Revenue Code includes -partnerships. among
the entities
sub/ect to the ta& on -corporations., said code which are
not necessarily-partnerships. in the technical sense of the
term
*PARTNERSHIPS includes a 01IC$E, RO#3, 3OO!, 4OI$ 5E$#RE, or
other unincorporated organi6ation, through or by the means of
which anybusiness, financial operation, or venture is carried
on
*a /oint venture need not be underta%en in any of the standard
forms,
or in conformity with the usual re7uirements of the law on
partnerships, in orderthat one could be deemed constituted for
purposes of the $8 on corporations
PASCUAL vs. C.I.R.
*co'ownership or co'possession does not itself establish a
partnership, wh
such co'owners or co'possessors do or do not share any profits
made by thof the property
*the sharing of gross returns does not itself establish a
partnership, withpersons sharing them have a /oint or common right
or interest in any profrom which the returns are derived
* aside from the circumstances of profit, the presence of other
ele
constituting partnership is necessary, such as9() the clear
intent to form a partnership2) the e&istence of a /uridical
personality different from that of the ind
partners :) the freedom to transfer or assign any interest in
the property by on
the consent of the others
*an isolated transaction whereby 2 or more persons contribute
funds t
certain real estate for profit in the absence of other
circumstances showcontrary intention cannot be considered a
partnership
*persons who contribute property or funds for a common
enterprise and
to share the gross returns of that enterprise in proportion to
their contrib"#$ who severally retain the title to their respective
contribution, are not th
rendered partners they have no common stoc% or capital and no
community of intere
principal proprietors in the business itself which the proceeds
derived
* a /oint purchase of land, by two does not constitute a
co'partners
respect thereto, OR does an agreement to share the profits and
losses osale of land create a partnership
*in order to constitute a PARTNERSHIP INTER SESE there must
e
; an intent to form the same"; generally participating in both
profits and losses C; such a community of interest, as far as third
persons are conc
as enables each party to ma%e a contract, manage the busand
dispose of the whole property
* the common ownership of property does not itself create a
partn
between the owners, though they may use it for the purpose of
ma%ing gainthey may without becoming partners, agree among
themselves as tmanagement and use of such property and the
application of the protherefrom
8/13/2019 Doctrines in Partnership Law
2/2
*the sharing of returns does not in itself establish a
partnership within the
persons sharing therein have a /oint or common right or interest
in the property
there must e!
() clear intent to form a partnership2) the e&istence of a
/uridical personality different from the individual
partners :) the freedom of each party to transfer or assign the
whole property
DUTERTE vs. RALLOS
*an agreement between 2 persons to operate a coc%pit, by which
one is to
contribute his services and the other to provide the capital,
the profits to bedivided between them, constitutes a
partnership
DELUAO vs. CASTEEL
* a contract of partnership to e&ploit a fishpond pending
its award to any
7ualified party or applicant is 5!I "#$ a contract of
partnership to divide thefishpond after such award is I!!E!
*one of the causes of dissolution is < any event which ma%e
it unlawful for the
business of the partnership to be carried on or for the members
to carry it on inpartnership
C.I.R. vs. SUTER
*a #I5ER0! 3R$ER0=I3 re7uires either that the ob/ect of the
association
be9() all the present property of the partners as contributed by
them to the
common fund OR2) all that the partners may ac7uire by their
industry or wor% during the
e&istence of the partnership
*the subse7uent marriage of the partners could not operate to
dissolve the
partnership because it is not one of the causes provided for
dissolution by lawwith regards to limited partnerships
*partnership has distinct and separate personality from that of
its partners
*a husband and wife may not enter into a contract of general
co'partnership>
#I5ER0! partnership
ACOAD vs. MABATO
* a partnership may be constituted in any form E8CE3$ where
immovable
property or real rights are contributed thereto, in which case a
public instrumentshall be necessary
*A C"NTRACT of PARTNERSHIP is #"ID
whenever immovable property is contributed thereto, if
-invento
said property is not made, signed by the parties and attached to
the instrument
EVANGELISTA vs. ABAD SANTOS
*an I#0$RI! 3R$ER cannot engage in "#0IE00 +OR =IM0E!+, #the
partnership e&pressly permits him to do so
I+ =E 0=O#! O 0O, the capitalist partners may either9() E8C!#E
him from the firm OR2) 5I! themselves of the benefits which he may
have obtained in vio
of this provisionwith a right to ME0 in either case
*the prohibition against an industrial partner engaging in
business for h
see%s to prevent any conflict of interest between the industrial
partner anpartnership and to ensure faithful compliance by said
partner with his prosta
