*mutter mutter*

TELL ME wth the answer has to do with question! please leave a comment if u can help me out. Much obliged

Do you agree that we should retain the 20-partner limit for limited liability partnerships for now, but empower the Minister to increase the limit in the future?


3.1.1 In Jersey and the UK, an LLP must consist of at least two partners. Article 21 of the Limited Liability Partnerships (Jersey) Law 1997 (“Jersey LLP Act”) provides that an LLP “shall be dissolved immediately upon there ceasing to be two or more partners in the partnership.” In the UK, if an LLP is left with one partner and that partner knowingly allows the LLP to continue with him as the sole partner for more than 6 months, he loses the protection of limited liability. In US-Delaware, an LLP must start with two or more partners, but if the LLP is subsequently left with one partner, it appears that the LLP can still continue to operate.

3.1.2 The team is still considering whether we should statutorily require LLPs in Singapore to have at least two partners. One view is that as a partnership is by definition “a voluntary association of two or more persons who jointly own and carry on a business for profit”, a one-member LLP will be a misnomer and may be misleading and confusing. It will also be inconsistent with international practice as described above. The other view is that we should allow LLPs to operate with one partner. This will be more convenient for some businessmen, who may otherwise have to find an additional partner before they can form an LLP. Proponents of this view feel that as the government has already accepted the CLRFC’s proposal to allow private companies to incorporate with just one shareholder and one director (who can be the same person), an LLP should be allowed to operate with one partner. The team would like to seek further views on this matter before finalising its recommendation.