Topic 2: Business Structures (part II)
Enterprise Law
Unit 700254
1Topic Outcomes
On completion of Topic 2 (part II), you should be able to:
◦ Outline the reasons for and importance of registering a business
name
...
Topic 2: Business Structures (part II)
Enterprise Law
Unit 700254
1Topic Outcomes
On completion of Topic 2 (part II), you should be able to:
◦ Outline the reasons for and importance of registering a business
name
◦ Explain the legal restrictions imposed on the use of a business
name
◦ Understand the three elements of a Partnership
◦ Explain the considerations for entering a lease
◦ Outline the following types of intellectual property (IP)
◦ Trademark
◦ Copyright
◦ Patents
2Business Names
Registration of a business name is required in all jurisdictions by business
names legislation where the owner/s do not use their own name(s) or
company name.
Can check availability and register with ASIC.
An application will be refused if:
The name is already registered in the state or territory
The name is similar to a name already registered in the state or
territory
The name has already been registered as a company name
Upon registration, the name is not “owned” but may be used for
the period of registration
3Business Names
The purpose of registration includes:
◦ Virtual monopoly rights on registration (but no proprietary right);
◦ Identification of the owners;
◦ Avoiding confusion by preventing similar or identical names being
registered; and
◦ Provision of a public registry where information concerning the
registered business can be accessed.
4Elements of a Partnership
The Partnership Act 1892 (NSW), s1(1) tells us a partnership is
‘… the relation which exists between persons carrying on a
business in common with a view of profit …’.
Statements by the parties that they are or are not partners are not
conclusive
Three elements of a Partnership
Carrying on a business
In common
With a view of profit
5Elements of a Partnership
(1) Carrying on a business
In the past the courts have made a strong
distinction between one-off enterprises and
ongoing activity, however, today courts tend to
take a more flexible approach
Preparatory work:
compare Khan v Miah (2000) and Keith Spicer v
Mansell (1970)
6Elements of a Partnership
Khan v Miah (2000)
Khan and Miah agreed to be partners in a restaurant business
Khan had provided funding for the project and was closely
involved in the planning and acquisition of premises,
purchasing furniture and setting up a bank account
Prior to opening there was a falling out and the men ended
their relationship
Held: Khan was a partner
7Elements of a Partnership
Keith Spicer v Mansell (1970)
Bishop and Spicer intended to form a company to run a
restaurant
They didn’t end up starting a company and the restaurant
never opened
Dispute arose as to liability to pay for furniture
Issue for the court was whether Spicer and Bishop were
partners
Held that the parties’ arrangement didn't satisfy the ‘carrying
on’ requirement
8Elements of a Partnership
(2) In Common
Requires consideration of whether potential partners
are carrying on the same business or two related, yet
separate businesses.
A strong indication is whether they both experience
the same losses/gains
See: Taxicab Co Ltd v Stone [1930] and Degiorgio v
Dunn [2004] ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::CONTENT CONTINUED IN THE ATTACHMENT:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
[Show More]