LD 1609
pg. 109
Page 108 of 148 An Act To Establish the Uniform Partnership Act Page 110 of 148
Download Bill Text
LR 1469
Item 1

 
determination that: (i) the economic purpose of the partnership is
likely to be unreasonably frustrated; (ii) another partner has
engaged in conduct relating to the partnership business which makes
it not reasonably practicable to carry on the business in
partnership with that partner; or (iii) it is not otherwise
reasonably practicable to carry on the partnership business in
conformity with the partnership agreement. The court's power to
wind up the partnership under Section 801(5) cannot be varied in
the partnership agreement. See Section 103(b)(8).

 
RUPA deletes UPA Section 32(1)(e) which provides for
dissolution when the business can only be carried on at a loss.
That provision might result in a dissolution contrary to the
partners' expectations in a start-up or tax shelter situation, in
which case "book" or "tax" losses do not signify business
failure. Truly poor financial performance may justify
dissolution under subsection (5)(i) as a frustration of the
partnership's economic purpose.

 
RUPA also deletes UPA Section 32(1)(f) which authorizes a
court to order dissolution of a partnership when "other
circumstances render a dissolution equitable." That provision
was regarded as too open-ended and, given RUPA's expanded
remedies for partners, unnecessary. No significant change in
result is intended, however, since the interpretation of UPA
Section 32(1)(f) is comparable to the specific grounds expressed
in subsection (5). See, e.g., Karber v. Karber, 145 Ariz. 293,
701 P.2d 1 (Ct. App. 1985) (partnership dissolved on basis of
suspicion and ill will, citing UPA §§ 32(1)(d) and (f)); Fuller
v. Brough, 159 Colo. 147, 411 P.2d 18 (1966) (not equitable to
dissolve partnership for trifling causes or temporary grievances
that do not render it impracticable to carry on partnership
business); Lau v. Wong, 1 Haw. App. 217, 616 P.2d 1031 (1980)
(partnership dissolved where business operated solely for benefit
of managing partner).

 
9. Section 801(6) provides for judicial dissolution on
application by a transferee of a partner's transferable interest
in the partnership, including the purchaser of a partner's
interest upon foreclosure of a charging order. It is based on
UPA Section 32(2) and authorizes dissolution upon a judicial
determination that it is equitable to wind up the partnership
business (i) after the expiration of the partnership term or
completion of the undertaking or (ii) at any time, if the
partnership were a partnership at will at the time of the
transfer or when the charging order was issued. The requirement
that the court determine that it is equitable to wind up the
business is new. The rights of a transferee under this section
cannot be varied in the partnership agreement. See Section
103(b)(8).


Page 108 of 148 Top of Page Page 110 of 148