Mauritius Application for Reservation of Limited Partnership Name (Form S16.F LP1)

Candidate selection

GOV-4988 ("GovSchema Standard Research"). Fresh re-scan of CATALOG.md's Executive Summary found the two most-recently-authored CBRD schemas (GOV-4974's LP4 removal, GOV-4981's LLP6 change-of-partner) both disclosing the same remaining backlog: name-reservation forms LP1 (Limited Partnerships Act) and LLP3 (Limited Liability Partnerships Act), the Annual Return (LP3), and a Foundation change-of-name form — none of these four re-verified live by any prior cycle, only named.

This cycle re-fetched CBRD's own downloadable-forms listing (https://companies.govmu.org/cbrd/downloadable-forms/, HTTP 200) fresh and confirmed all four are still linked and live: APPLICATION-FOR-RESERVATION-OF-LIMITED-PARTNERSHIP-NAME_LP1.pdf (HTTP 200, 67,647 bytes), RESERVATION-OF-NAME-LLP_LLP3.pdf (HTTP 200, 68,215 bytes), Annual-Return_LP3.pdf (HTTP 200, 51,203 bytes), and APPLICATION-TO-CHANGE-NAME-OF-A-FOUNDATION.pdf (HTTP 200, 63,218 bytes). The confirmed-dead NOTICE-OF-CHANGE-OF-MANAGER_LLP6.pdf link was also re-tested and remains HTTP 404.

LP1 ("Application for Reservation of Limited Partnership Name") was picked over its three siblings per this registry's "one deliverable per PR" convention: it is the direct Limited Partnerships Act 2011 counterpart of the already-authored LP2 (registration) schema, sharing LP2's own "Category" (Domestic/Foreign/Global Business) checkbox verbatim, and is a natural companion to file immediately before LP2 in an actual applicant's own filing sequence (reserve a name, then register the partnership). LLP3, Annual-Return LP3, and the Foundation change-of-name form remain open backlog for a future cycle.

Reaching the live source

https://companies.govmu.org/cbrd/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/APPLICATION-FOR-RESERVATION-OF-LIMITED-PARTNERSHIP-NAME_LP1.pdf

• Independently re-fetched via plain unauthenticated curl (a -o /dev/null -w byte-count check, then a full download) — no session/cookie state, no CAPTCHA/WAF challenge, the same unauthenticated hosting pattern as every other CBRD form this registry has already modelled.
• HTTP 200, 67,647 bytes.
• sha256 of the retrieved bytes: 375c648f588d1babd274a26d48c5c3cee0433acc6fbe756fa73e4308d71bee18.
• 1 page, confirmed via pdfjs-dist's numPages.
• getTextContent() returned 131 positioned text items — a genuine text layer, with every printed label, checkbox-adjacent caption, and blank-line dot-leader run recovered cleanly (no AcroForm annotations, same as every sibling CBRD schema).
• A supplementary canvas render (node-canvas, 3x scale, cropped to four regions: the Category checkbox row, the "Tick where appropriate" instruction, the applicant-identification boxes, and the three proposed-name rows) independently confirmed box/checkbox layout. As on every prior CBRD render, glyph rendering failed via a Helvetica path-resolution warning (the known node-canvas font-substitution gap documented in this registry's gov-form-pdf-extraction practice note) — used for box/layout confirmation only, not text confirmation.

Authority attribution

The form's own header ("LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS ACT 2011", "(Section 16(1))", form code "S16.F LP1") 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).

Structural findings

1. Category checkbox is a verbatim match of LP2's own field. The canvas render confirmed three distinct bordered checkboxes beside "Domestic" / "Foreign" / "Global Business", identical in wording and layout to the already-authored limited-partnership-registration (LP2) schema's own category field — modelled with the same domestic / foreign / global_business enum for consistency.
2. Three proposed-name rows, each paired with its own small "(Office Use)" approval box. The canvas render confirmed each of the preferred-choice, first-alternative, and second-alternative rows prints a wide applicant-facing entry box immediately followed by a narrower Department-only box (visible once, labelled "(Office Use)", beside the preferred-choice row; the first- and second-alternative rows repeat the same narrow box unlabelled). None of the three office-use boxes are modelled, consistent with this registry's standing convention of excluding Department-internal approval fields.
3. "Tick where appropriate." is an orphaned instruction with no adjacent checkbox. Printed as its own line beneath Note (3) and above the "Presented by" block, a wider canvas crop (y=1550-1950 at 3x scale) confirmed no checkbox, box, or other markable control appears anywhere near it — it is not modelled as a field. The most likely reading is that it is leftover boilerplate referring back to the Category checkboxes higher on the page (the form's only checkboxes), printed in a fixed template position rather than directly beside them.
4. Vertical sidebar "Application" watermark text. The extracted text stream includes fragments "Iaa" (y=717.1, x=352.4, likely a rendering artifact near the header) and a vertically-split "A" / "pplicat" / "ion" running down the left margin at x=50.4 — a decorative sidebar label reading "Application" top-to-bottom, the same non-field template decoration seen on other CBRD forms. Not modelled.
5. No "director"-for-"partner" boilerplate defect found. Unlike several prior CBRD companion schemas, this form's text was checked for the recurring "director" boilerplate substitution bug and none was found — the form consistently uses "applicant" throughout, since no partnership yet exists at the name-reservation stage.

Requiredness and scoping decisions

• applicantFullName, applicantPostalAddress: required — the form provides no alternative path to identify the applicant.
• category: required, following LP2's own precedent for this identical checkbox.
• proposedNamePreferredChoice: required — a name-reservation application is meaningless without at least one requested name.
• proposedNameFirstAlternative, proposedNameSecondAlternative: optional — the form's own top-of-page note treats alternates as a fallback, not a requirement ("If there are more names to be reserved, please attach a separate sheet...").
• signatureOfApplicant, declarationDate: required — standard declaration block.
• presentedByName, presentedByAddress: required, following this registry's standing "Presented by" convention (see LP5's own VERIFICATION.md).
• presentedByTelephone: optional — no asterisk or other mandatory marking, and the LP5 sibling's equivalent-position "Reference" field is likewise optional.

Validation

• node tools/validate.mjs: pass.
• node tools/validate-ajv.mjs: pass (all schemas, including this one).
• Ephemeral conformance check (not committed): 3 valid scenarios (preferred-choice-only; preferred plus both alternatives; preferred plus telephone supplied) and 8 required-field-omission mutations (one per required field) all rejected as expected, plus 1 unknown-field-rejection and 1 invalid-enum-value rejection (category: "nonexistent") — 13 checks total, all passing.
• npm run build-index (in tools/govschema-client/): registry index rebuilt, 689 → 690 documents.

Scope and disclosed backlog

Mauritius's Business Formation vertical gains a fifteenth schema. Mauritius remains 4 of 6 verticals open. LLP3 (name reservation, LLP Act), Annual-Return LP3, and the Foundation change-of-name form all remain confirmed-live, unauthored backlog for a future cycle — LLP3 is the most likely next candidate, as the direct LLP-Act analogue of this schema.