Five brothers - Jack, Ken, Lenny, Matt and Nick – carried on business together as butchers.
Nick, the youngest of the five brothers, is currently 25 years’ old.
Two years ago, the five brothers decided to acquire new business premises and bought a large
shop on the local high street. The shop was conveyed to all five of them (in alphabetical
order) to hold for themselves as equitable joint tenants.
Last year, Jack borrowed £10,000 from his friend, Oliver, to fund a surprise party for his wife.
He used his interest in the shop to secure repayment of the loan.
Six months ago, Ken decided to emigrate with his family to Australia. He asked his brothers if
they would consider buying his interest in the shop. Over the next three weeks, Ken and his
brothers had a number of meetings at which they negotiated the terms on which they would
buy Ken’s interest. At the penultimate meeting, Lenny withdrew from the negotiations
because he thought Ken was asking too much for his interest. At the final meeting, Ken orally
agreed to sell his interest to Jack, Matt and Nick for £50,000, and they orally agreed to
purchase it at that price.
A few days later, Ken wrote the following letter: “I confirm that I am selling my interest in
the shop to Jack, Matt and Nick for £50,000. I have hired a solicitor to complete the necessary
paper work as soon as possible.” Ken posted a copy of this letter to all his brothers, at their
respective home addresses, using regular mail. Jack’s letter was lost in the post and never
delivered. The other letters were all delivered. However, Matt accidentally threw away his
letter (unopened) with some junk mail.
Ken and his family emigrated to Australia two months ago. Shortly after arriving, Ken got lost
in the outback and died of exposure. By his will, he left all his property to Nick.
The transfer of Ken’s interest in the shop had not been completed by the time of his death.
Advise the parties as to the legal and equitable ownership of the shop.
Nick, the youngest of the five brothers, is currently 25 years’ old.
Two years ago, the five brothers decided to acquire new business premises and bought a large
shop on the local high street. The shop was conveyed to all five of them (in alphabetical
order) to hold for themselves as equitable joint tenants.
Last year, Jack borrowed £10,000 from his friend, Oliver, to fund a surprise party for his wife.
He used his interest in the shop to secure repayment of the loan.
Six months ago, Ken decided to emigrate with his family to Australia. He asked his brothers if
they would consider buying his interest in the shop. Over the next three weeks, Ken and his
brothers had a number of meetings at which they negotiated the terms on which they would
buy Ken’s interest. At the penultimate meeting, Lenny withdrew from the negotiations
because he thought Ken was asking too much for his interest. At the final meeting, Ken orally
agreed to sell his interest to Jack, Matt and Nick for £50,000, and they orally agreed to
purchase it at that price.
A few days later, Ken wrote the following letter: “I confirm that I am selling my interest in
the shop to Jack, Matt and Nick for £50,000. I have hired a solicitor to complete the necessary
paper work as soon as possible.” Ken posted a copy of this letter to all his brothers, at their
respective home addresses, using regular mail. Jack’s letter was lost in the post and never
delivered. The other letters were all delivered. However, Matt accidentally threw away his
letter (unopened) with some junk mail.
Ken and his family emigrated to Australia two months ago. Shortly after arriving, Ken got lost
in the outback and died of exposure. By his will, he left all his property to Nick.
The transfer of Ken’s interest in the shop had not been completed by the time of his death.
Advise the parties as to the legal and equitable ownership of the shop.
