header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
31 July 2009 / Mark Sharpley
Issue: 7380 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

LLPs: dispelling the myths

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Mark Sharpley debunks some untruths about limited liability partnerships

Mark Sharpley debunks some untruths about limited liability partnerships
LLPs are a way of organising a business and, in particular, legal practices. While the solicitors practice, “the business”, under LLP status is legally a body corporate, the partners limit their personal liability and avoid putting their personal assets at risk. This is not something that a member of a normal partnership can do. In addition they are no longer responsible for the acts of the other partners. The principal difference is that an LLP has the organisational flexibility of a partnership and is taxed as a partnership. In other respects it is very similar to a company.

Ownership

Two or more individuals or companies may form an LLP to carry on a profit-seeking business with a view to profit. LLPs are not available for activities such as non-profit-making activities.

Apart from allowing partners to limit their liability, probably the most significant difference between an LLP and a normal partnership is that an LLP can

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll