More context is needed e.g. what is the object or are the objects of the corp. vs. any partnership 'purpose' as - over half a century ago in Ecuador - there had been some 'confusion' over whether civil had been synonymous with a registrable mercantile / commercial co., plus agri-businesses came to be excluded from registration as such a company form:

'.....La primera Ley de Compañías de febrero de 1964, en el inciso segundo del artículo 134 de entonces, establecía que ‘La Compañía Anónima es una sociedad mercantil’; pero el artículo 8 del D.S. 766 de marzo de 1965 suprimió al término *mercantil* de modo que desde la codificación de la Ley, que se hizo en 1968, ese artículo, que continuó con igual numeración, ya no incluye ese término. ...

.....El Decreto Supremo 199, de 8 de febrero de 1971, en su artículo 60, estableció en la Ley de Compañías que las Compañías en *predios rústicos*, a que se refería el artículo 94 de la entonces Ley de Reforma Agraria y Colonización, que solo podían constituirse adoptando formas de Sociedades Civiles, no podían adoptar en el futuro, la forma propia de una Sociedad Anónima. ....'

Otherwise, on the non-difference with a sociedad > compañía anónima (Ecu, Ven) - corporation: synonym > sociedad anónima or corporación (West).

The KudoZ glossaries aren't very helpful on this Central American score, esp. with entries referring to 'sociada'.

As language masters or teachers at my school in the South of England used to (AmE) holler and (BrE) bawl, 'Can't you keep a *civil* tongue in your head, boy!', so I will refrain from commenting on such crass mis-spelling.

One thing's for sure, as a 1. compañía - as opposed to una sociedad civil de personas 2. being anónima with 'anonymous' shareholders and 3. despite the misnomer in ENG of '& Co.' (vs. & Co. Ltd.), it is not a private partnership. Otherwise, I will eat my Panama/ Ecuadorian or toquilla straw hat.






--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 5 hrs (2019-07-29 07:03:19 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

You are welcome.

The differences, predicated on the assumption that the anónima word might turn the company into public in Spain (query: Ecuador):

1. a private company usually has few members and, if it issues any shares (a company limited by guarantee/ guaranty would not), would keep its shareholders confined to a group to restrict sale of shares to insiders, like a family. If initially with five or less members, would then in the UK be a close company and in the US, a closed corporation.
2. a public trading corp. could offer its shares to the public to subscribe for: not clear what your notaris/zed instrument says and
3. floated on the stock market: en la bolsa, again for public subscription for shares.
4. all of this assumes that there is no 'public limited partnership' in the picture: NB a joint-stock corp. in the US can be a. a partnership in which the capital is 'divided into shares' or b. an unincorporated association of individuals (Black's Law Dictionary). In the UK, a joint stock co. is an example of an incorporated body and is an unusual label en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint-stock_company


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 19 hrs (2019-07-29 20:59:08 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

No. I haven't seen such, JMT, but I I can tell you what an expensive Panama hat - from a well-known millinery shop in London's Picadilly - looks and feels like after being accidently soaked in the rain. It was heartbreaking - I was cursing in Spanish and my office manager in Irish.