Short answer. No. Under the Civil Code, a managing partner appointed in the articles of partnership holds authority that is irrevocable without just or lawful cause. Revoking the power without cause requires the vote of partners representing the controlling interest — but the cause requirement still stands. Without cause, revocation is not permitted.
What the law says
The partner who has been appointed manager in the articles of partnership may execute all acts of administration despite the opposition of his partners, unless he should act in bad faith; and his power is irrevocable without just or lawful cause. The vote of the partners representing the controlling interest shall be necessary for such revocation of power.
Civil Code, Article 1800 — Powers of a Managing Partner. Read the full provision →
Why appointment in the articles creates stronger protection
The law draws a sharp distinction between a manager appointed in the articles of partnership — the founding document — and one appointed later by a separate agreement. An appointment in the articles is part of the very fabric of the partnership. The other partners knew about the arrangement when they joined. For that reason, Article 1800 gives that appointment a high level of protection: the power is irrevocable without just or lawful cause. The managing partner can act despite opposition from the other partners, as long as he does not act in bad faith.
What counts as just or lawful cause
The Civil Code does not list every possible ground, but "just or lawful cause" for revoking a managing partner's authority would typically include conduct that betrays the trust the partnership placed in him: fraud, serious mismanagement, conflicts of interest, or acting in bad faith against the partnership's interests. Disagreements over strategy, personality clashes, or a mere majority preference for a different manager are not just cause. The standard is meaningful — it exists precisely to prevent partners from removing a manager by simple majority vote whenever the winds shift.
Revocation requires the controlling interest
Even when just cause exists, the revocation does not happen automatically or by any individual partner's unilateral act. Article 1800 requires the vote of the partners representing the controlling interest. What constitutes the controlling interest depends on the articles themselves — typically this means partners holding more than half of the partnership's capital contributions, but the specific partnership agreement may define it differently. Document the vote carefully: the basis for cause, who voted, and the outcome. A revocation without proper procedure or cause can be challenged.
The contrast with managers appointed after formation
The statute explicitly states that a power granted after the partnership has been constituted may be revoked at any time. This is the opposite rule. If the managing authority was not part of the original articles but was conferred by a separate act — a board resolution, a supplemental agreement, or a vote taken after the partnership was formed — that authority is freely revocable by the partners without needing to show any cause. The timing and method of appointment determine which rule applies. If you are unsure which applies to your situation, the specific language of your partnership documents is the starting point.