WHAT ARE THE KEY ELEMENTS OF A PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT?

A South African partnership agreement should set out, in writing, the partners’ identities and contributions, profit and loss share ratios, capital accounts and drawings rules, management and voting authority, banking and accounting arrangements, dispute resolution, restrictive covenants (non-compete, non-solicit), default and expulsion triggers, and dissolution and exit mechanics. South African partnership law is not statutory in origin — a partnership exists wherever there is mutual intention to carry on a business together for joint profit, the test articulated in Cohen v Assics 1906 TH 186 and reinforced by Polkinghorne v English 1934 TPD 62 — which is why a written agreement is not legally required to form one but is strongly advisable to prevent the disputes that arise when partners fall out. Burger Huyser Attorneys’ Commercial Law / Contracts practice drafts and reviews partnership agreements for clients across Gauteng.

Is a Partnership Agreement Legally Required in South Africa?

No. Under South African common law a partnership comes into existence the moment two or more parties carry on a business together with the intention of making joint profit — the existence, or absence, of a written contract is not what determines whether a partnership exists. The defining test is mutual intention, articulated in Cohen v Assics 1906 TH 186 and reinforced by Polkinghorne v English 1934 TPD 62. This is why a partnership can be created by a handshake, an oral understanding, or a course of conduct that implies one — and why a court will find a partnership even where the parties have called their arrangement something else.

A written agreement is nevertheless strongly advisable. South African partnership law remains largely common-law and Roman-Dutch; there is no national Partnership Act on the statute book, and the default rules fall out of case law rather than a codified statute. Without a written agreement, disputes over contributions, profit share, management authority, and exit are decided by reference to those common-law defaults — most of which lean toward equal sharing and joint management, regardless of what the parties actually intended or contributed.

It is important to distinguish the unincorporated partnership from operating through a registered company (Pty Ltd) under the Companies Act 71 of 2008, where ownership and management structure are statutorily defined and registration creates a separate legal entity. A partnership is not a separate legal entity — the partners, jointly and severally, are the parties to every debt the partnership incurs. That exposure is one of the central reasons a clear written agreement matters, even where the law does not compel one.

What a Partnership Agreement Must Set Out (Essential Elements)

A defensible South African partnership agreement addresses the following fourteen points. Each is a clause that, left unstated, falls back to a common-law default the partners may not have bargained for.

1. Partner identities, addresses, and effective date — the full legal names of the partners, their residential or business addresses, and the date on which the partnership commences.
2. Nature and scope of the business — a clear description of the trade, profession, or venture the partnership will carry on, so that activities outside this scope are not automatically within a partner’s authority to bind the firm.
3. Capital contributions and capital-call rules — opening contributions (cash, assets, or services valued in rands), the capital account each partner maintains, and the procedure for calling additional capital if the business needs it.
4. Profit and loss allocation — explicit share ratios (e.g. 50/50, 40/30/30), distribution timing, and the accounting basis on which profit is measured.
5. Drawings — how much each working partner may draw, how often, and whether drawings are advances against profit share or guaranteed amounts.
6. Management authority and decision-making — which partner can bind the firm in the ordinary course of business, what decisions require unanimous or special-majority consent, and how deadlock is broken.
7. Banking — the bank, the account, who is an authorised signatory, and the threshold above which dual signatures are required.
8. Accounting — the partnership’s fiscal year, accounting standards, audit or independent-review requirements, and each partner’s right of access to the books.
9. Restrictive covenants — non-compete, non-solicitation of clients and staff, and confidentiality, both during the partnership and after a partner exits.
10. Dispute resolution — internal escalation, then mediation, then arbitration or litigation in a specified forum and seat.
11. Default events and expulsion grounds — insolvency, criminal conviction involving dishonesty, breach of fiduciary duty, persistent breach after written notice, and the cure period attached to each.
12. Death, retirement, and exit — valuation mechanism, payout terms, and the good leaver / bad leaver distinction that determines the price of the departing partner’s share.
13. Dissolution and winding-up — events triggering dissolution, the accounting on dissolution, and whether the remaining partners have an option to continue.
14. Governing law and forum — South African law and a clear dispute-resolution seat.

This is the minimum; sophisticated arrangements (carried interests, vest-and-leave, waterfall distributions, sleeve arrangements, or partnerships involving juristic entities) will need additional clauses tailored to the deal.

Partnership vs Close Corporation vs Private Company

The choice of vehicle determines which statute, if any, applies, who is liable for debts, how the entity is taxed, and how disputes are governed. The table below summarises the comparison at a glance.

Feature	Partnership (common-law)	Close Corporation (CK)	Private Company (Pty Ltd)
Legal status	Not a separate legal entity	Separate legal entity	Separate legal entity
Governing law	Common law + Roman-Dutch (no national statute)	Close Corporations Act 69 of 1984	Companies Act 71 of 2008
Liability of owners	Joint and several for partnership debts	Limited to unpaid portion of member’s contribution	Limited to any unpaid amount on shares
Formation	No registration required	Registration with the (former) Registrar of Close Corporations	Registration with CIPC via Memorandum of Incorporation
Current status	Still available	Effectively closed to new formations post-Companies Act 2008	Standard commercial vehicle
Tax treatment	Partners taxed individually on share of partnership profit	CC taxed as entity; members taxed on amounts received/dividends	Company taxed at corporate rate; dividends taxed in shareholders’ hands
Common use	Small professional practices, family ventures	Legacy entities still operating	Commercial ventures of any size

The Close Corporations Act 69 of 1984 remains operative for existing CCs, but the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) no longer registers new close corporations. Any business starting fresh today will choose between a common-law partnership and a new Pty Ltd registered under the Companies Act 71 of 2008.

Key Clauses and What They Should Specifically Say

The essential-elements list above sets out the topics; the clauses below explain what each of them should actually say on the page.

Profit and loss clause

State the share ratio unambiguously (e.g. 50/50, 40/30/30) and address whether salaries paid to working partners come out of profit before or after the profit-and-loss allocation. Treating a working partner’s salary as a pre-allocation expense changes the economics materially and is one of the most common causes of internal dispute.

Capital accounts clause

Capture opening balances, contributions tracked separately from drawings, interest on capital (if any), and the consequences of a partner’s capital account going negative. A negative capital account is not a windfall — it typically signals that the partner has drawn more than their share and creates a debt back to the partnership.

Management clause

Draw a clean line between routine management (a single partner can bind the partnership within the ordinary course of business) and major decisions that require unanimous or special-majority consent. The “major decisions” list should include borrowing above a stated threshold, admitting a new partner, changing the nature of the business, disposing of assets above a stated value, signing guarantees, and appointing or dismissing senior staff. The voting procedure should be specified, including a tie-breaker (chair, casting vote, independent mediator) so that deadlock does not paralyse the venture.

Restrictive covenants

Duration is commonly 12 to 24 months post-exit. Scope and geographic area must be tailored to the partnership’s actual protectable interests — not the entire industry and not the entire country, regardless of where the partnership actually operates. South African restraint-of-trade law applies the reasonableness test articulated in Maguba v Claase 1939 WLD 11 and developed in its progeny: the restriction must be reasonable in scope, area, and duration to be enforceable. An overbroad clause will be set aside; a tightly drawn clause will be upheld.

Dispute resolution clause

Build the steps in ascending order: a defined internal discussion period, then mediation under a recognised mediator body, then arbitration under the Arbitration Act 42 of 1965 with an identified seat, before any party may approach a court for interim relief. This staged escalation costs less than litigation and, critically, preserves the partnership’s commercial confidentiality.

Default clause

Enumerate the events — insolvency, criminal conviction involving dishonesty, breach of fiduciary duty, persistent breach of the agreement after written notice — attach a cure period to each, and specify the consequence (expulsion, valuation, buyout). Each event is a fact-specific determination; spelling them out prevents later argument about what the partners actually agreed.

Exit mechanics

Decide up front how a departing partner’s share is valued: an agreed formula (e.g. a multiple of maintainable profit), an agreed accountant, or expert determination. Decide the payout terms — lump sum versus instalments with security — and the good leaver / bad leaver distinction that determines whether the payout is at market value or a discounted formula. The good leaver / bad leaver distinction is the most consequential commercial term in the agreement, and the most commonly omitted one.

Common Disputes a Well-Drafted Agreement Prevents

Most partnership disputes are foreseeable at the outset and arise from the same handful of gaps. A well-drafted agreement addresses each of them by name:

• Disputes over how profit is split when partners have contributed different proportions of time versus capital.
• Disputes over whether a partner can bind the partnership to a major contract without consent.
• Disputes over the value of a departing partner’s share when no valuation mechanism was agreed.
• Disputes over whether a partner can compete with the partnership after leaving.
• Disputes over whether a partner’s personal creditors can attach partnership assets.
• Disputes over who controls the partnership bank account when trust between partners breaks down.

Each of these has a documented South African case-law outcome behind it. The agreement is the place to pre-empt them, not the courtroom where they are ultimately decided.

Why Joint and Several Liability Changes the Stakes

In a partnership each partner is jointly and severally liable for the partnership’s debts. A creditor may sue any one partner for the full amount, and that partner must seek contribution from the others afterwards. This single feature reshapes every commercial decision the partnership makes.

It makes it critical to specify, in the management clause, which partner can bind the partnership to what category of obligation — especially borrowing, leases, and guarantees. It means that the personal insolvency of one partner can cascade to the others unless the agreement deals with it via default-and-exit clauses. And it means that, without a written agreement, partners may have no contractual basis to discipline a partner who exposes the others to excessive risk, because the common-law default rules lean toward equal sharing and joint management regardless of who brought the risk into the partnership.

Joint and several liability is also why the firm’s Commercial Law / Contracts practice typically insists on a tightly drawn management clause and a default clause that responds to insolvency events — not as a matter of pessimism, but because those clauses are how the partners protect themselves from each other.

When a Partnership Is the Wrong Vehicle (and What to Choose Instead)

An unincorporated partnership is not always the right form. The following situations call for an alternative, and the agreement that ultimately gets signed should reflect a conscious choice of vehicle rather than a default:

• Where any partner wants limited liability. A private company (Pty Ltd) under the Companies Act 71 of 2008 is the standard alternative and gives shareholders the protection of separate legal personality.
• Where the venture involves a regulated profession (law, audit, medical) the relevant professional body’s rules may dictate the permitted structure, including restrictions on incorporated practice.
• Where the venture will hold appreciating immovable property or significant intangible IP, an incorporated entity typically offers cleaner succession and disposal mechanics than a partnership.
• Where partners have materially different risk appetites, time commitments, or capital contributions, an incorporated vehicle with a tailored shareholders’ agreement gives more granular control than a partnership agreement — and Burger Huyser Attorneys drafts shareholders’ agreements alongside partnership agreements through the same Commercial Law / Contracts practice.

The right answer is sometimes “incorporate now” and sometimes “start as a partnership, then incorporate when the venture grows” — but that decision should be made in writing, before the first transaction is signed.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Does a partnership agreement have to be in writing in South Africa?

No — South African common law does not require a written agreement to form a partnership; one exists wherever parties carry on a business together with the intention of making joint profit, per the test in Cohen v Assics 1906 TH 186. A written agreement is nevertheless strongly recommended because the absence of one leaves profit share, capital contributions, and management authority to be inferred from conduct, which is fertile ground for disputes when relationships sour.

What’s the difference between a partnership and a private company (Pty Ltd) in South Africa?

A partnership is an unincorporated relationship between two or more persons carrying on a business for joint profit; the partners are jointly and severally liable for its debts and there is no separate legal entity. A private company (Pty Ltd) is a separate legal entity registered with CIPC under the Companies Act 71 of 2008, and its shareholders’ liability is limited to any unpaid amount on their shares. Each carries different tax, governance, and risk consequences, and the choice between them should be made with legal advice before commitments are signed.

Can a partnership agreement restrict what a partner does after they leave?

Yes, provided the restraint is reasonable in scope, geography, and duration under South African restraint-of-trade law (the test from Maguba v Claase 1939 WLD 11 and its progeny). A non-compete clause that is overly broad in area, too long, or unrelated to the partnership’s actual protectable interests is unenforceable as a restraint of trade; an agreement tailored to the actual business and limited to 12–24 months is typically defensible.

How are partnership profits taxed in South Africa?

The partnership itself is fiscally transparent — it does not pay income tax. Each partner is taxed on their share of the partnership profit in their own hands, whether or not the profit is actually distributed. Salary or drawings paid to a working partner are deducted from the partnership’s gross income in computing its taxable income, and SARS treats partners as carrying on a trade jointly, with each partner’s share allocated per the partnership agreement.

What happens if a partner dies or becomes insolvent?

Under the common law, the death, insolvency, or other specified event affecting any partner can trigger dissolution of the partnership — but the partnership agreement can override this by giving the remaining partners an option to continue the partnership and buying out the deceased or insolvent partner’s share using an agreed valuation mechanism. This is one of the most important clauses a well-drafted agreement must contain, and one of the most common omissions in agreements drafted without legal input.

Can a partnership agreement be changed once the partners have signed it?

Yes, but only with the consent of all partners (unless the agreement itself sets a different threshold for amendments of specific clauses). Any variation should be recorded in writing and signed by every partner, because informal “we’ll change it later” understandings are unenforceable and a common source of disputes.

If you are setting up a partnership, or revisiting the partnership agreement you already have, Burger Huyser Attorneys’ Commercial Law / Contracts team can draft, review, or revise the agreement to reflect the partners’ actual contributions, profit share, and exit expectations. The work is handled from the firm’s Linden, Randburg head office at 49 First Avenue (011 888 0246) and through branches across Gauteng, with J’Retha van Rensburg as Commercial Law & Contracts specialist consultant. The firm carries a 4.8/5 average across 250+ Google reviews (Trustindex verified “Top Rated Law Firm in South Africa”) and was named Commercial Law Firm of the Year 2025 – South Africa by 5 Star Lawyers Awards.