Mauritius Notice of Change of Name of a Limited Liability Partnership (Form S20/F LLP5)

Candidate selection

GOV-4939 ("GovSchema Standard Research"). The prior seven CBRD Mauritius Business Formation cycles (GOV-4897/4904/4911/4918/4925/4932) authored LLP1, the Foundation registration form, LLP2 Consent of Partner, the LP Consent of General Partner, LP5 (Notice of Change of Name of a Limited Partnership), and LP7 (Notice of Change in Registered Particulars), disclosing a shrinking backlog of confirmed-live companion/notice forms on each cycle's own VERIFICATION.md. The most recent disclosure (GOV-4932) left three items open: LLP4 (Notice of Change in Registered Office), LLP5 (Notice of Change of Name of a Limited Liability Partnership), and LLP8 (Application for removal of Limited Liability Partnership from Register) — alongside a further unscreened batch surfaced on the GOV-4925 cycle (a distinct LLP7 "Registered Particulars" notice, change-of-general-partner, change-of-manager/ partner (LLP6), name-reservation (LP1, LLP3), annual return (LP3), and a Foundation change-of-name form).

LLP5 was picked over its five disclosed/unscreened siblings because it is the direct Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2016 analogue of the already-authored LP5 (Notice of Change of Name of a Limited Partnership, GOV-4925) — the same relationship that made the LLP2/LP Consent pair (GOV-4911/GOV-4918) and the (still-banked) LLP4/LP4 pair natural companions. Modelling a direct Act-for-Act analogue of an already-published schema is the fastest path to a correct schema this registry has repeatedly found reliable, while still surfacing genuine terminology differences between the two Acts (see "Document structure" below).

Reaching the live source

https://companies.govmu.org/cbrd/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/NOTICE-OF-CHANGE-OF-NAME-OF-A-LIMITED-LIABILITY-PARTNERSHIP_LLP5.pdf

• Plain unauthenticated curl, no session/cookie state, no CAPTCHA/WAF challenge — same unauthenticated hosting pattern as every other CBRD form this registry has already modelled.
• CBRD's own downloadable-forms listing page (https://companies.govmu.org/cbrd/downloadable-forms/) was re-fetched fresh this cycle (HTTP 200, 185,260 bytes) and its HTML grepped for the exact LLP5 filename, confirming the URL above byte-for-byte rather than reusing a banked guess.
• HTTP 200, 47,107 bytes retrieved.
• sha256 of the retrieved bytes: adc86d07611430acc318600dde83871f5659c1509771c1f55761d8f2b23c1428.
• 1 page, confirmed via pdfjs-dist's numPages.
• getAnnotations() returned 0 form-field annotations — not an interactive AcroForm, same as every sibling CBRD schema.
• getTextContent() returned 123 positioned text items — a genuine text layer, with every printed label and blank-line dot-leader run recovered cleanly, including exact (x, y) positions per item.
• A canvas render at 2.5x scale (node-canvas) confirmed the form's body prints three small bordered boxes (Registered No., Category, Date of Registration) stacked beneath a single-ruled-line box ("Present name of Limited Liability Partnership"), then a second single-ruled-line box ("Proposed Name of Limited Liability Partnership") — the identical three-box identification-block layout already modelled on the LP5 sibling, not the two-box layout on the LP7 sibling. The render also confirmed two small unlabeled checkboxes positioned beside the footer's "Sheet ___ of ___ (for office use)" line, matching the officer-only marks already disclosed on LP5. As on every prior CBRD render, several Helvetica glyphs dropped from the declaration block (the known node-canvas font-substitution gap, already documented in this registry's own gov-form-pdf-extraction practice note) — the text layer itself supplied those labels without ambiguity, so no field was left unmodelled because of the render gap.

Authority attribution

The form's own header ("THE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS ACT 2016", "(Section 20)") and its hosting directly on the Corporate and Business Registration Department's own domain (companies.govmu.org/cbrd/, the same authority already attributed on every other CBRD schema in this registry) attribute authority to the Corporate and Business Registration Department (abbreviation CBRD) directly.

Extraction method

A single positional text-layer dump (sorted by descending y-coordinate, then x, grouped into rows using a 2-point y-tolerance) reconstructed the form's row structure — the same method used on every prior CBRD sibling. A supplementary canvas render (see above) confirmed the box/checkbox layout.

Document structure

Page 1 (single page):

• Header: "FOR OFFICE USE" (label) | "S20 - F LLP5" (printed form reference codes, not fillable) | "Document Folio" (officer-only small box beneath it) — none modelled, same officer-only header pattern as every sibling CBRD schema.
• Title block: "THE LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPS ACT 2016" / "NOTICE OF CHANGE OF NAME OF A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP" / "(Section 20)" — static, not modelled.
• Existing-partnership identification block: "Present name of Limited Liability Partnership" (single-ruled-line box), followed by three small bordered boxes stacked vertically — "Registered No.", "Category", "Date of Registration" — directly analogous to the existing-record identification block already modelled on the LP5 sibling, for the same reason: this notice is a post-registration amendment, not a first-filing form, so the Department needs the partnership's own registered number, category, and original date of registration to match the notice to the correct existing record. All three modelled required, same as LP5.
• New-name block: "Proposed Name of Limited Liability Partnership" (single-ruled-line box) — a genuine wording difference from the LP5 sibling: LP5's equivalent field is labelled only "Name of Limited Partnership" on the form itself (this registry's schema disambiguates it as newNameOfLimitedPartnership since the source reuses "Name of ... Partnership" for both the present- and new-name fields), whereas this form explicitly prints "Proposed Name of Limited Liability Partnership", removing any labelling ambiguity at the source. Modelled as proposedNameOfLimitedLiabilityPartnership, matching the form's own explicit wording.
• Declaration block: "Signature of partner(s): ______", "Name of partner(s): ______", "Date: ______" — a second genuine wording difference: the LP5 sibling (Limited Partnerships Act 2011) prints "general partner(s)" throughout, reflecting that Act's distinction between general and limited partners; this Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2016 form prints only "partner(s)", since the 2016 Act has no general-partner role. Modelled as signatureOfPartner / nameOfPartner (not ...GeneralPartner) to match the source's own terminology. As with LP5, the form prints no "attach a separate sheet" boilerplate for multiple partners despite the plural "(s)" wording; each is modelled as a single field matching the form's own single printed line.
• "Presented by:" block (filer, applicant-fillable): "Name: ______" (two printed lines, modelled as one field), "Address: ______" (two printed lines, modelled as one field), "Reference: ______" (one line, optional) — same convention as every sibling CBRD schema.
• "(For office use)" column, printed alongside "Presented by:": "Other fees :... ....." (fee schedule, three unlabeled rows), "Officer's Name:", "Sig:", "Date:" — all officer-only, not modelled.
• Footer: "Sheet ___ of ___ (for office use)" plus two small unlabeled checkboxes positioned immediately beside it (confirmed via canvas render, see above) — officer-only administrative marks, not modelled, same as LP5.

Conformance

No requiredWhen gates are used — every field on this form is either unconditionally required or unconditionally optional (presentedByReference), same pattern as the LP5 sibling. An ephemeral, uncommitted Node script exercised:

• 2 valid scenarios: (1) all required fields supplied, presentedByReference omitted; (2) all fields including presentedByReference supplied.
• 9 required-field-omission mutations (one per required field: presentNameOfLimitedLiabilityPartnership, registeredNo, category, dateOfRegistration, proposedNameOfLimitedLiabilityPartnership, declarationDate, signatureOfPartner, nameOfPartner, presentedByName, presentedByAddress — 10 required fields total, each independently rejected as expected).
• 1 unknown-field-rejection mutation, rejected as expected.

Both node tools/validate.mjs and node tools/validate-ajv.mjs pass against the full registry with this schema included.

Scope and disclosed backlog

This schema does not model any of the other companion/notice forms on the same downloadable-forms listing:

• Notice of Change in Registered Office (LLP4) and Application for removal of Limited Liability Partnership from Register (LLP8) — the two remaining Limited Liability Partnerships Act 2016 companion forms disclosed since GOV-4911, re-confirmed still linked on this cycle's fresh fetch of the listing page but not independently re-byte-verified this cycle. Left open, disclosed backlog.
• Consent of Manager (LLP2 sibling form) and Application for Removal of Limited Partnership from Register (LP4) remain the two genuine dead links (HTTP 404) on the Department's own hosting first disclosed on the GOV-4911 cycle, not re-tested this cycle.
• Surfaced on the GOV-4925 cycle, still unscreened: a distinct NOTICE-OF-CHANGE-IN-REGISTERED-PARTICULARS_LLP7.pdf (an LLP-family "Registered Particulars" notice distinct from the already-authored LP7), NOTICE-OF-CHANGE-OF-GENERAL-PARTNER_LP.pdf, NOTICE-OF-CHANGE-OF-MANAGER_LLP6.pdf, NOTICE-OF-CHANGE-OF-PARTNER_LLP6.pdf, APPLICATION-FOR-RESERVATION-OF-LIMITED-PARTNERSHIP-NAME_LP1.pdf, RESERVATION-OF-NAME-LLP_LLP3.pdf, Annual-Return_LP3.pdf, and APPLICATION-TO-CHANGE-NAME-OF-A-FOUNDATION.pdf. None of these were fetched or byte-verified this cycle; flagged here again so a future cycle re-scans the listing page directly rather than only the previously banked candidate names.

Full company incorporation itself remains out of scope (login-gated CBRIS portal, no static equivalent, per every prior CBRD schema's own disclosed scope).