Short answer. No, not against the partnership. Article 1820 makes a partner's admission about partnership affairs evidence against the partnership only when made within the scope of his authority. A statement made outside that scope does not bind the partnership as evidence, even though it may still be used against the partner personally.
What the law says
An admission or representation made by any partner concerning partnership affairs within the scope of his authority in accordance with this Title is evidence against the partnership.
Civil Code, Article 1820 — Admissions by a Partner. Read the full provision →
Scope of authority is the condition, not an afterthought
Article 1820 states the rule with a built-in qualifier: an admission or representation made by any partner concerning partnership affairs within the scope of his authority in accordance with this Title is evidence against the partnership. The phrase 'within the scope of his authority' is not a minor detail; it is the condition that makes the admission usable against the partnership at all. If the partner making the statement had no authority, under the partnership agreement or under the general rules on a partner's authority as an agent, to speak on that particular matter, the statement falls outside what this article treats as binding evidence.
Why the law ties admissions to authority
A partner is generally treated as an agent of the partnership for its business, which is why statements a partner makes within that role can fairly be held against the partnership, the same way an admission by an authorized agent binds a principal. But extending that same weight to anything any partner happens to say about partnership matters, regardless of whether they had any real authority over the subject, would let an unauthorized or rogue statement create evidence against partners who never sanctioned it. Limiting the rule to statements within the scope of authority keeps the evidentiary consequence tied to genuine representative capacity.
What still happens to the statement itself
Falling outside Article 1820 does not necessarily make the statement disappear from a dispute entirely; it simply means the statement cannot be used as an admission binding the partnership as such. The statement may still carry consequences for the individual partner who made it, and depending on the circumstances, it might still be relevant to prove what that partner personally believed, said, or did, even without operating as evidence against the partnership itself. The distinction is between evidence against the partnership as an entity and evidence concerning the partner in his individual capacity.
What to check when this issue comes up
If a partner's statement about partnership affairs is being used against your partnership in a dispute, the key question is whether that partner had authority over the subject matter of the statement at the time it was made. Reviewing the partnership agreement and how authority is actually allocated among partners helps establish whether a given statement was within or outside that scope, since the outcome under Article 1820 turns entirely on that question rather than on how confidently or publicly the statement was made.