Restaurant or Shop Partnership Without a Contract in Kuwait: How to Prove Your Share and What Happens in a Dispute or When a Partner Leaves

Many small businesses in Kuwait start on trust rather than on paper. Two friends open a restaurant; two relatives rent a shop for perfume, a salon or a car wash. One puts up the money and the other runs the place, or both contribute and the licence is issued in one name because that is "quicker" or "simpler". The first and second years pass without trouble. Then the partners fall out over profits, management or expansion, or one of them wants to leave, and the person who financed the business discovers that the licence, the lease and the bank account are all in the other partner's name, and that he holds not a single document saying he is a partner.

At that moment the question is always the same: have I lost my rights because there is no written contract? The short answer is: not necessarily. Kuwaiti law does not make the existence of a partnership between the partners themselves depend in every case on a signed document. It looks at the substance of the relationship: did you agree to contribute to a venture and share its profit and loss? If that is proven, the consequences of a partnership follow, including a right to profits, to an account and to a share on winding up. Proof, however, is the real battleground, and how the dispute is handled from day one can decide the outcome.

This article is devoted to unwritten partnerships and businesses registered in the name of one partner. Disputes between partners in formally registered companies are covered separately in Partner Disputes, Dissolution and Liquidation of Companies in Kuwait, Partner and Shareholder Disputes in Kuwaiti Companies and A Partner's Exit and Sale of Shares in Kuwait. Here we focus on what comes before all of that: how to prove you are a partner at all, what happens to your share if you fall out or one of you leaves, who bears the business's debts, and how to turn an informal partnership into a formal company before problems arise.

Quick Answer

• No written contract does not mean no partnership: what matters is the real agreement to contribute to a venture and share its results, which can be inferred from facts, documents and correspondence.
• A licence in one person's name does not settle ownership between the partners: it determines who appears before government bodies and third parties; the internal relationship is governed by the actual agreement.
• The closest legal characterisation in many such cases is a joint venture (sharikat al-muhassa), an undisclosed partnership that does not appear to third parties and has no legal personality. The relationship may instead be characterised as a loan, financing for a return, or paid employment.
• Evidence: bank transfers, WhatsApp messages, set-up invoices, account sheets, past profit distributions, witnesses and circumstantial indications.
• The core court tool: a claim to establish the partnership and for an account, with a request to appoint an accounting expert, plus interim measures such as judicial receivership or precautionary attachment where there is urgency.
• Debts: creditors in principle pursue the person they dealt with and who appeared before them (the licence holder); the partners then settle accounts internally.
• Warning: where the licence is held by a Kuwaiti but the business is in reality owned by a non-Kuwaiti in breach of the law, this may amount to commercial concealment, which carries criminal consequences for both sides.

Legislative Framework

Kuwait has no dedicated statute on "unwritten partnerships". The applicable rules are spread across several laws, applied according to the nature of the business and the facts of the dispute:

• Civil Code, Law No. 67 of 1980: contains the general rules on the partnership contract, including its definition as a contract by which two or more persons undertake to contribute money or work to a financial venture in order to share the resulting profit or loss; the default rules on sharing profit and loss where the agreement is silent; the invalidity of a clause that excludes a partner entirely from profit or exempts him entirely from loss; and the grounds for termination and division of partnership assets. It also contains the general rules on unjust enrichment, agency and loans that may be relevant when characterising the relationship.
• Companies Law, Law No. 1 of 2016: regulates the forms of commercial company, including the joint venture, the form that best fits many "silent partner" arrangements: it has no legal personality, is not subject to publication formalities, and third parties deal only with the visible partner. It also regulates the incorporated forms into which a partnership can later be converted, such as the limited liability company, the general partnership and the single-person company.
• Commercial Law, Law No. 68 of 1980: governs commercial acts, traders and the business as a going concern, and establishes freedom of proof in commercial matters as a general principle, which is significant in this type of dispute.
• Law of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Matters, Law No. 39 of 1980: determines when written evidence is required and when witness testimony and presumptions are admissible, and contains the rules on the "beginning of written proof", interrogation, oaths and experts.
• Civil and Commercial Procedure Law, Law No. 38 of 1980: governs filing claims, interim applications, precautionary attachment and enforcement.
• Legislation on commercial licensing and combating concealment: which determines who may conduct business in his own name and criminalises concealment arrangements. We summarised its general rules in Commercial Concealment in Kuwait.

Characterisation is not a formality. Calling the relationship a partnership gives the other party a right to profits and to a share in the value of the business, and makes him bear a share of the losses. Calling it a loan gives him only the right to recover the amount, with no profit and no exposure to loss. That is why the parties usually fight over characterisation before anything else.

Substantive Rules

1. When does a partnership exist without a written contract?

Under the general rules of the Civil Code, a partnership rests on three elements: more than one partner, a contribution by each in money or work, and the intention to participate in a venture and share its profit or loss. The last element is decisive. Someone who gave a friend money to open a restaurant on the understanding that he would take half the profit, bear half the loss and see the accounts is most likely a partner. Someone who handed over money to be repaid on a fixed date whatever the outcome of the business is most likely a lender, even if the money was called a "contribution".

The intention to participate is inferred from indications: periodic profit distributions at a fixed ratio, consultation on decisions, access to the accounts, sharing losses or injecting further funds when needed, and being introduced to staff or suppliers as a "partner". The more of these indications there are, and the more they support one another, the stronger the case for a partnership.

2. What does a licence in one partner's name mean legally?

The commercial licence, the shop lease and the official records identify the person who appears before the State and third parties: he answers to the regulators, he is the party to the lease, and staff are usually registered under him. These documents do not, by themselves, settle the internal relationship between the partners. The shop can be registered to one of them while the other holds a fixed share under their agreement.

That is precisely the model of the joint venture: a partnership concluded between two or more people that remains undisclosed. Only the partner who trades in his own name appears to third parties; the venture has no separate estate; everything the visible partner does is attributed to him externally; and the partners then settle their rights among themselves according to their agreement. So the silent partner usually cannot require the licensing authority or the landlord to transfer the licence to him on the ground that he is a partner, but he can require the visible partner to pay his share of the profits and of the value of the business.

See The Business as a Going Concern under Kuwaiti Law for its elements (trade name, customers, leasehold right, equipment and stock), since these are what gets valued when the business is appraised and shares are settled.

3. The de facto company

Sometimes the partners intended to form a company but their agreement did not meet the form required by law, or they began trading before incorporation was complete. Doctrine and case law recognise the concept of the de facto company: a contract void for a formal defect is not erased retroactively for the period in which the company actually operated. Its past existence is recognised for the purpose of settling rights between partners and protecting third parties, and the nullity in principle operates only for the future. We discussed this in the context of companies under formation in Companies under Formation, Founders' Liability and the De Facto Company. The practical point is that a partner is not deprived of realised profits or his share on winding up merely because the company was never registered. The position differs fundamentally where the nullity stems from an unlawful object or cause, such as arrangements built on criminal concealment.

4. Partnership, loan, financing or paid work?

In most of these disputes the licence holder adopts whichever characterisation suits him. If the financier claims half the value of a restaurant that has succeeded, the answer is "it was a loan and I will repay it". If the business failed and the financier wants his money back, the answer becomes "he was a partner and shares the loss". The partner who ran the restaurant may say "I was a partner through my work", and the financier replies "he was an employee on a salary". The court decides on the whole of the evidence, not on a label used in a passing message. Influential indications include:

• Was there a fixed repayment date? That points towards a loan.
• Was the return a share of profit that varied with it? That points towards a partnership.
• Was the return a fixed amount unaffected by profit and loss? That points towards a loan or a wage, depending on who pays whom.
• Did the party absorb past losses or inject further funds to cover a shortfall? That is a strong indication of partnership.
• Did the manager receive a fixed salary only, a salary plus a percentage, or a percentage only?

5. Sharing profit and loss when the agreement is silent

If agreed ratios are proven, they apply. If the partnership is proven but the ratios are not, the general Civil Code rule is that each partner's share of profit and loss is proportionate to his contribution to the capital. The question becomes delicate where one partner contributed work (running the restaurant day to day) and the other money: the value of the work contribution must then be assessed under the law, the agreement and the court's appreciation, usually with the help of an expert.

A fundamental rule is that a partner may not be excluded entirely from profit or exempted entirely from loss, the so-called "leonine clause". If one party stipulated a guaranteed fixed return with no exposure to loss, the whole relationship may be re-characterised as something other than a partnership, or the clause may be struck down, depending on the circumstances. On withholding and claiming profits in registered companies, see Profit Distribution and Retention in Kuwaiti Companies.

6. A partner's withdrawal and settlement of his share

Unwritten partnerships are usually of indefinite duration. The general rules then allow a partner to withdraw by notice to his co-partners, provided he does so in good faith and at a suitable time that does not inflict sudden harm on the business. A partner may also ask the court to end the partnership where the other partner commits a serious breach or there is another serious reason, such as appropriating the revenue or refusing to render accounts.

When one partner leaves, the question is: how much is he owed? Two things must be distinguished:

• Return of capital: what the partner originally paid in. This is not necessarily what he is entitled to, as the business may have gained or lost value.
• Value of the share on exit: his share of the net assets of the business (equipment, fit-out, stock, leasehold right, trade name and goodwill) after deducting debts, plus his share of undistributed profits, or less his share of losses.

If the partners agree on a valuation, the agreement should be put in writing and the amount paid. If not, the route is a claim for an account and winding up in which an expert is appointed. The same logic, in the context of registered companies, is covered in A Partner's Exit and Sale of Shares in Kuwait. The rules on dividing co-owned property may also come into play when jointly held assets are liquidated; see Partition of Co-owned Property under Kuwaiti Law.

7. When the licence holder takes over the business

This is the most common and most painful scenario. The licence holder changes the locks or passwords, bars his partner from the premises, diverts revenue to a personal account, sells the business to a third party, or declares: "the shop is mine, the licence is in my name, I have no partner". Legally, holding the licence gives him administrative control; it does not give him ownership of his partner's share. Once the partnership is proven, the silent partner may claim his share of past profits, the value of his share in the business, and damages where the conditions are met.

Urgent steps may be needed to preserve the right before it is lost, including:

• An application to record the state of affairs, documenting the shop's contents, equipment and stock before they are moved or sold.
• Judicial receivership over the business or its revenue where there is an urgent danger in leaving the assets with the partner in possession; the court assesses whether it is justified.
• Precautionary attachment over the partner's assets where its conditions are met, including a debt of certain existence and a fear of losing the security for its payment.

The criminal route, such as a complaint of breach of trust, is not suitable in every case. Investigators and courts often regard a dispute between partners as a civil dispute over accounts, and the offence exists only if its legal elements are present. A criminal complaint without solid grounds can weaken your negotiating position and may even expose you to liability if it proves vexatious. This option should be assessed carefully, after reviewing the documents.

8. The business's debts: who pays?

Because a joint venture has no separate estate and does not appear to third parties, creditors in principle pursue the person they dealt with: the landlord pursues the tenant named in the lease, the supplier pursues whoever signed the order or issued the cheque, the bank pursues the borrower, and staff pursue the registered employer. The silent partner is not, in principle, directly liable to them, unless he dealt with the creditor himself or held himself out as a partner or guarantor in a way that binds him.

That does not put the silent partner beyond reach of the debt altogether. In the internal account he bears his share of the business's debts and losses just as he takes his share of its profits. If the licence holder paid business debts from his own money, he can recover the silent partner's share. Hence the importance of every debt being genuinely linked to the business rather than to personal expenses, which is what the accounting expert examines.

9. Death of a partner

If the visible licence holder dies, the business assets registered in his name pass, on their face, to his heirs, and the silent partner finds himself facing heirs who know nothing of the arrangement. If the silent partner dies, his heirs may not even know he had a stake in a restaurant or shop. In both cases the right survives and can be proven and claimed, but proof becomes much harder without one of the parties to the agreement. That alone is reason enough to document any partnership in writing.

10. How do you prove your share? Evidence and its weight

Since the business is usually commercial (restaurant, retail shop, salon, café), the general principle in commercial matters is freedom of proof: the agreement may be proven by any means, including witnesses and presumptions, unless the law provides otherwise. Where the relationship is civil as regards one party, the civil evidence rules may apply, including the requirement of writing above the threshold set by the Law of Evidence. Even then, the "beginning of written proof" is an important way through: a message or document from the other party that makes the agreement likely opens the door to completing proof with witnesses and presumptions. The most useful evidence in practice:

• Bank transfers: the set-up money, equipment payments or advance rent, sent from your account to your partner or directly to suppliers and the landlord. Their value increases if they carry a reference such as "my share in the restaurant" or "shop fit-out".
• Reverse transfers: periodic transfers from your partner to you in varying amounts that track monthly profit. These are among the strongest indications that you were receiving a share of profit, not loan instalments.
• WhatsApp and email: messages such as "this month's profit, your share is X", "we each need to put in money to cover the shortfall" or "my partner so-and-so". Their evidential weight depends on attribution and integrity, as explained in Electronic Messages and WhatsApp as Evidence in Kuwait.
• Invoices and supplier contracts: for furniture, kitchen and equipment, if issued to you or paid by you.
• Account sheets and profit statements: any monthly spreadsheet your partner sent you, or a shared accounting app or file.
• Witnesses: staff, the accountant, suppliers and friends who witnessed the agreement or knew you as partners. The court assesses their testimony.
• Interrogation and oaths: you may ask for the other party to be questioned on specific facts, and he may admit part of the truth. The decisive oath is a last resort with its own risks and must be weighed carefully.
• General indications: your name or photo in marketing material, your signature on employment contracts or decisions, your dealings with suppliers, and your holding keys to the shop or access to the point-of-sale system.

Beware of evidence that hurts you: an old message saying "pay me back whenever you can" may be used as proof that the money was a loan, not a share. Correspondence must be reviewed as a whole, not selectively, and the characterisation built on the full picture. For the general rules of evidence, see Evidence in Civil and Commercial Matters in Kuwait.

Principles of the Court of Cassation

General principles relevant to these disputes recur in the case law of the Kuwaiti Court of Cassation. We state them in general terms:

• The Court of Cassation has consistently held that characterising a contract and giving it its correct legal description is a question of law subject to its review, and that what counts is what the parties actually intended, not the words and labels they used.
• It has also consistently held that inferring the existence of a partnership and the intention to participate from the facts and documents is within the discretion of the trial court, provided its reasoning is sound and grounded in the record.
• It is settled that assessing the expert's work, and adopting his report in whole or in part or setting it aside, is within the trial court's discretion, and that the court need not appoint another expert if the record is sufficient to form its view.
• It is likewise settled that a joint venture is an undisclosed partnership that does not exist as regards third parties, that third parties have recourse only against the partner they dealt with, and that relations between the partners are governed by their agreement.
• The Court has consistently held that weighing witness testimony and presumptions and drawing conclusions of fact from them is for the trial court, without review, provided its conclusions are reasonable.

Methodological note: these principles are stated in general terms reflecting the settled direction of Kuwaiti case law. We have not cited appeal numbers or judgment dates, because verifying the text and context of each judgment requires the official law reports. They should not be relied on as verbatim holdings of particular judgments, only as an explanation of the general judicial approach.

Practical Steps and Documents

Before any claim

• Gather evidence immediately, before escalating: export complete WhatsApp chats, request bank statements for the whole life of the business, and keep copies of invoices, photos and shared files. Once the dispute is out in the open, messages may be deleted, groups closed and your access withdrawn.
• Do not send angry messages: anything you write during the dispute may end up in court. Avoid threats and avoid conceding a characterisation that does not serve you.
• Send a measured written demand: through a lawyer, asking for an account and your share, or proposing a settlement. Your partner's reply, or silence, may carry evidential weight.
• Assess the regulatory position: is the partnership lawful in itself, or does it involve a concealment arrangement that could rebound on you? This determines the whole approach.

The court route

• Claim to establish the partnership and for an account: filed before the competent court, seeking a finding that the partnership exists and its ratios, an order that the partner render accounts, and the appointment of an accounting expert to examine revenue and expenses and determine the profits due. See Claims for an Account and Settlement of Accounts under Kuwaiti Law.
• The accounting expert: usually the heart of the case. The expert reviews bank statements, the point-of-sale system, supplier invoices, rent and payroll, hears both parties, and assesses net profit, each party's share and the value of the assets. You may submit memoranda and documents to the expert and challenge the report. See Court-Appointed Experts in Kuwait.
• Winding-up requests: once the partnership ends, you ask for its assets to be liquidated and each partner's net share determined; the court may appoint a liquidator.
• Interim and protective measures: recording the state of affairs, judicial receivership and precautionary attachment, depending on the level of risk.

Documents usually needed

• Bank statements showing amounts paid to the business or the partner, and amounts received from him.
• A copy of the commercial licence and the lease, if obtainable.
• A full export of the relevant WhatsApp chats with dates.
• Invoices, quotations and supplier and contractor agreements.
• Any account sheets or profit reports exchanged.
• Witness names, contact details and a note of what each knows.
• Any unsigned draft contract, which, though not binding, may indicate what was agreed.

Amicable solutions and converting the partnership into a formal company

Many of these disputes can be resolved without court, or at least shortened, if handled rationally. The main practical options:

• Settlement on an agreed valuation: the partners choose an independent accountant to value the business, agree in advance to accept the valuation, and one buys out the other for a price paid in one sum or documented instalments.
• A written settlement agreement: acknowledging the partnership and its ratios, the amount due, the payment method, mutual waiver of claims, and the fate of the trade name, equipment and staff.
• Mediation: a trusted intermediary, or a lawyer managing the negotiation, is often cheaper than litigation and better for relationships.
• Arbitration: if both parties agree in writing, the dispute can be resolved outside the courts, more privately.
• Conversion into a formal company: if the partners want to continue, the best course is to incorporate a company under Companies Law No. 1 of 2016, recording the shares in writing and regulating management, profit distribution, exit, valuation and pre-emption rights. For one of the available forms, see The Single-Person Company under Kuwaiti Companies Law.

Even if the partners do not want to incorporate, a short written joint-venture agreement can save years of dispute. It need only cover: the partners' names, the amount or nature of each contribution, profit and loss ratios, who manages and who signs, the right to inspect accounts, how to withdraw and value a share, what happens on death, and how disputes are resolved.

Hypothetical Cases

Case 1: My money, his licence

Hypothetical facts: Khaled paid to fit out a café; his friend Fahad obtained the licence in his own name and ran the café day to day. They agreed orally to split profits equally. For two years Fahad sent Khaled varying monthly amounts with messages such as "your share of this month's profit". The café succeeded, Fahad received an offer to sell it, and he told Khaled he would return only his original money because it "was a loan".

Legal characterisation: varying transfers tied to monthly profit, and messages describing them as a "share of profit", strongly indicate a partnership rather than a loan. The closest characterisation is a joint venture with Fahad as the visible partner. If proven, Khaled is entitled to his share of unpaid profits and of the café's value on sale, not merely the return of his capital. It is worth acting before the sale completes and considering appropriate protective measures.

Case 2: The working partner locked out of the restaurant

Hypothetical facts: Sara, a professional chef, agreed with an investor that he would finance a restaurant in his name while she ran the kitchen, menu and operations for one third of the profits and no salary. After a successful year, the investor barred her from the premises, saying she was "an employee" with no rights in the business.

Legal characterisation: no salary, an agreed share of profit and actual operational control indicate that her contribution to the partnership was work. If, however, she was on a fixed salary, registered as an employee and paid a discretionary "bonus", the relationship may be characterised as employment, bringing her rights within the Private Sector Labour Law No. 6 of 2010. The difference is significant: a partnership gives her a share of profits and of the value of the business; employment gives her an employee's entitlements. The right route is chosen after reviewing the evidence.

Case 3: Losses and debts after closure

Hypothetical facts: two partners in a clothing shop registered to one of them, Nasser. The shop lost money and closed, leaving rent arrears and supplier debts, which Nasser paid from his own funds. He then asked his silent partner for half, and was refused: "the licence is in your name, you are responsible".

Legal characterisation: it is true that the landlord and suppliers in principle have recourse only against Nasser, the visible party they dealt with. Internally, however, if the partnership and its ratio are proven, the silent partner bears his share of the loss, and Nasser may recover that share of the business debts he paid, after the account is settled and any revenue Nasser kept for himself is deducted.

Quick Comparison of Possible Characterisations

• Partnership (joint venture): the financier shares in profit and in the value of the business, bears a share of losses, does not appear to third parties, and may claim an account and winding up.
• Loan: the lender recovers only the amount on the agreed date, with no share of profit and no exposure to loss.
• Financing for a fixed guaranteed return: closer to a loan; may raise questions about the lawfulness and nature of the return; confers no share in the business.
• Employment: the worker receives his wage and entitlements under the Labour Law, has no share in the value of the business and bears no loss.
• Registered company: shares documented in the articles, legal personality, and clear rules on exit, valuation and management; the safest position for both sides.
• Nominee licence used for concealment: an unlawful arrangement that may expose both parties to liability, is not a safe basis for a claim, and calls for careful legal assessment before any step.

Frequently Asked Questions

We have no written contract. Can I still sue?

Yes. The absence of a contract does not prevent a claim; it means proof rests on transfers, messages, witnesses and presumptions. In commercial matters the general rule is freedom of proof.

The licence and lease are in my partner's name. Does that make the shop his alone?

Not necessarily. Those documents show who appears before the authorities and third parties; rights between the partners are governed by the actual agreement, once proven.

Can I ask for the licence to be transferred to me?

A silent partner does not usually ask the authorities to transfer the licence; he claims his financial share of the profits and value from his partner. A licence transfer follows the competent authority's procedures and conditions and may form part of an amicable settlement.

How is my share calculated if we never agreed a ratio?

The general rule is that profit and loss are shared in proportion to capital contributions, with a separate assessment for a work contribution. The court usually relies on an accounting expert.

My partner refuses to show me the accounts. What can I do?

A partner is entitled to see the business accounts and to require the managing partner to render an account. If he refuses, a claim for an account is filed and an expert appointed to review bank records and the sales system.

Are WhatsApp messages alone enough?

They can be persuasive if attributable to the partner and clear in meaning, and they carry more weight when supported by bank transfers or witnesses.

I paid in cash with no transfer. Have I lost my right?

Proof is harder but not impossible. Other indications are examined: a cash withdrawal from your account around the same date, messages acknowledging receipt, witnesses to the handover, and any admission by your partner in correspondence.

Am I liable for the shop's debts if it is not in my name?

In principle creditors pursue only the person they dealt with. In the internal account with your partner, however, you bear your share of losses and of debts genuinely linked to the business.

Can I leave the partnership whenever I like?

In a partnership of indefinite duration you may withdraw by notice, in good faith and not at a time that harms the business. Your entitlement is the value of your share at exit, not simply the capital you paid in.

My partner sold the business without telling me. What now?

The silent partner may claim his share of the sale price and of past profits, with damages where the conditions are met. Protective measures over the price or the partner's assets may be considered. The rights of a good-faith buyer require separate analysis.

Should I file a breach-of-trust complaint against my partner?

Not always. Many partner disputes are civil in nature, and the offence exists only if its legal elements are present. This option should be weighed after reviewing the documents.

Is there a deadline after which my claim is lost?

Claims are subject to limitation rules that vary with the nature of the right and the characterisation of the relationship. Do not delay, and have a lawyer identify the applicable period.

The licence is held by a Kuwaiti and the money came from a resident partner. Is that a lawful partnership?

It depends on the nature of the agreement, the activity and the rules governing non-Kuwaitis' commercial activity. If in reality the resident is the true owner and the Kuwaiti merely a name, this may amount to criminal commercial concealment. We recommend taking legal advice before any claim; the general rules are summarised in Commercial Concealment in Kuwait.

How do we convert our partnership into a formal company?

First document the arrangement in a written contract setting out shares, profits and management; then choose the appropriate form (limited liability company, general partnership or another) and incorporate it with the competent authorities, transferring the business assets to it according to the prescribed procedures.

Conclusion

An oral partnership in a restaurant or shop does not cease to exist because it was never written down, and a financier's rights are not lost merely because the licence is in his partner's name. In practice, though, these disputes are won or lost on proof: someone who kept his transfers, messages and accounts from the start stands in a very different position from someone who relied on trust alone.

Characterisation is the key: partnership, loan or paid work. Each leads to a different financial result; the parties typically argue for whichever suits them at the moment of dispute, and the court decides by looking at what actually happened rather than at labels.

The best protection is prevention: a written agreement, however short, or converting the partnership into a formal company as soon as the business proves viable. If a dispute does arise, early and considered action, gathering evidence, avoiding angry messages and seeking protective measures where needed, preserves the right and shortens the road.

Legal Notice

This article is general legal information on Kuwaiti law and does not constitute legal advice or create any relationship between the reader and the firm. Its contents are subject to legislative amendment and to judicial application to the facts of each case, particularly regarding licensing, commercial concealment, evidential thresholds and limitation periods.

If you are a partner in a business without a contract, are in dispute with a partner who holds the licence, or want to document your partnership and convert it into a formal company, the team at Yumnaak Law Firm reviews your documents, assesses the right characterisation of your relationship, and handles negotiation, drafting of the settlement or partnership agreement, or the claim to establish the partnership and for an account, including the accounting expert stage. Contact us or book an appointment to review your case.