Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Political divorce.

Political divorce.

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Mar 24, 2018 8:21 am

Is there any mechanism for the division of assets when a party splits up?
I assume there is not, it is probably the main thing that holds some party's together, but is it time that such a thing was instituted?
If so, how should it work?
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10574
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Political divorce.

Postby atticus » Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:15 am

Almost certainly there is a mechanism. What that is will depend on the exact legal nature of the entity that owns the assets, and its particular constitution. The asset owning entity for some parties is a limited company, in which case company law applies (insolvency law if debts exceed assets).
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20680
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Political divorce.

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Mar 24, 2018 9:33 am

Can we for the moment assume that the party did not conceive the possibility of any split and therefore did not set out any process in the constitution?
In which case it would default to the rules of Company law, which say roughly what?
I can imagine it would be relatively straightforward for a company limited by shares: simply divide according to the share holdings, but I assume the parties cannot be so limited.
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10574
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Political divorce.

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:18 am

I can only think of one party which is a Company Limited by Guarantee. All of the rest are, so I understand, unincorporated associations.

I can't really think of any circumstances under which a party would decide to an amicable split. Such a division is always going to be the result of some really deep-seated division which cannot be remedied. Neither side in such a split is going to be willing to allow the other to take control of the Party's data and branding.

The usual arrangement, as we have discussed before, is that the losing side in some argument buggers off and starts a new party.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6543
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Political divorce.

Postby atticus » Sat Mar 24, 2018 10:32 am

Why is it necessary to make naïve assumptions?
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20680
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Political divorce.

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Mar 24, 2018 11:13 am

atticus wrote:Why is it necessary to make naïve assumptions?

Because doing so would deliver us the general answer which is most likely the starting point from which the parties would divert in the cases where the assumption proves erroneous.
The alternative is for somebody to find and trawl the parties constitutions to find the relevant passages.
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10574
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Political divorce.

Postby atticus » Sat Mar 24, 2018 3:26 pm

That somebody can be you.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 20680
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Political divorce.

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Mar 24, 2018 7:55 pm

Is that before or after I find the unicorns?
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10574
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.


Return to Constitutional Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest