There was some discussion at one stage about exempting partnerships from the requirement to be restricted to 20 persons. Is the Minister satisfied that it is not really a practical point and that at some later stage there might be an amendment? I think the practice in Common Market countries is to have much bigger partnerships than are permitted in the US and Canada?
SECTION 376.
Question proposed : " That Section 376 stand part of the Bill."
The original object of this requirement when introduced over 100 years ago was to get over the difficulty in dealing with a large body of individuals for, inter alia, litigation purposes. The figure fixed by legislation at the time was 20. There were representations to the Jenkins Committee by a number of associations that the rule should be relaxed for certain purposes but we are not aware of any great demand here for that kind of thing. It has been mentioned but I do not think anybody is greatly interested in having the figure increased.
I do not think that it is a strong point or a practical issue at this stage but does the Minister feel that at a later stage, if there were a demand, the law could be amended? Would it be too complicated to change it at this stage? Is that really the thought behind keeping it at 20?
We do not anticipate any problems will arise but if they do, we could take care of them.
I do not think that it is a practical point now but I wondered why we had kept it to 20.
Question put and agreed to.
Sections 377 to 386, inclusive, put and agreed to.