Treadstone Associates
Ask an Expert · 2 min read

Can a partnership hold a business licence, or does the regulator require an individual or a corporation?

It depends entirely on the regulator — Ontario's child care licensing statute disqualifies a partnership from holding the licence at all, while its liquor licensing regulation explicitly contemplates a partnership as the licensee.

Treadstone Associates · Updated 2026

Short answer

There is no single Ontario-wide rule on whether a partnership may hold a regulated business licence — each licensing statute answers it separately. The Child Care and Early Years Act disqualifies a partnership outright, with no size or ownership-share exception. The liquor licensing regulation goes the other way: it builds partnership licensees into its own transfer-trigger rules, meaning it assumes a partnership CAN hold the licence.

Where a partnership is disqualified outright

The Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, s.20(4) sets out when the director must issue or renew a licence, and lists exceptions. Paragraph (b) is a flat disqualification: the director shall issue or renew the licence unless “the applicant is under 18 years old, is a partnership or is an association of persons.” CCEYA, s.20(4)(b) There is no partial exception for a two-person partnership, a small ownership share, or a passive partner — the applicant simply cannot be a partnership at all. Two individuals who want to operate a child care centre together and hold the licence jointly have to incorporate; the partnership structure they might otherwise default to is not available for this licence.

Where a partnership is assumed to be a valid licensee

Ontario's liquor licensing regulation runs the opposite assumption. O. Reg. 746/21, s.154(1) para. 2 lists as a licence-transfer trigger: “A person becomes or ceases to be a partner of a licensee that is a partnership.” A regulation cannot list a trigger event for a partnership licensee's ownership changing unless a partnership can hold the licence in the first place — the liquor regime is built around partnerships as a normal licensee structure, rather than excluding them the way the CCEYA does.

The practical consequence

Confirming whether the target holds, or can hold, its licence as a partnership has to be checked against the SPECIFIC governing statute, not assumed from a general Ontario corporate-law default or from how a comparable licence works in a different regulated sector. A buyer structuring an acquisition of a licensed business around a partnership vehicle needs to know, licence by licence, whether that structure is even eligible to be the licensee.

Where This Plays Out in the Case Files

Sources

  • • Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014, S.O. 2014, c. 11, Sched. 1 — s.20(1) (application), s.20(4) (director's duty to issue or renew, incl. the partnership disqualification at clause (b), quoted above), s.20(5) (not transferable).
  • • O. Reg. 746/21 (Licensing) under the Liquor Licence and Control Act, 2019, s.154(1), para. 2 — the partnership-partner trigger, cited to show the regime assumes a partnership licensee is valid.
  • • Treadstone Law — partnership versus incorporation for Ontario business owners — general trade-offs between the two vehicles; it is written for unregulated businesses and does not address licensing eligibility.

See where AI pays off first in your business.

A 30-minute call is enough to tell you whether AI pays for itself here.

The Canadian benchmark

What do businesses like this one actually sell for?

Canadian small-business transaction data is not published anywhere, so most valuations in this country quote an American benchmark. The Deavo–Treadstone Acquisition Index is a daily record of Canadian listings built to replace that: asking-price distributions by province and city are published now, and days on market, departure rates and asking-to-sale spreads follow as the series lengthens. Leave an email and we will tell you as each measure lands.

No pitch, no listings. One email when the first report lands.