LWZ223-Case Study of Sophie and Dominic – Law Assignment Help

Assignment Task

Task

Hypothetical Questions:

Question 1.

In 2012, Sophie and Dominic buy a parcel of Torrens land in Fannie Bay, Darwin, for $750,000. The land comprised of a tennis court, which is surrounded by a tall wire fence, and a house with a large tropical garden. The purchase price of $750 000 was comprised of Sophie’s savings of $500,000, and her brother Dominic’s contribution of $250,000. The settlement occurred in March 2012, and the change in registered proprietor was registered on the title. For taxation reasons, Sophie’s name alone appeared on the transfer as purchaser. Sophie and Dominic had earlier orally agreed that Dominic (a former builder) would be housekeeper, would carry out some substantial renovations to the house, and would refurbish the tennis court to make it commercially viable. In return for these contributions (in addition to his financial contribution), they agreed he would get an equal share in the property.

In November 2012, the refurbishment and renovations were complete, and they entered into a licence agreement with Greg, a local tennis professional, to rent out the court for evening and weekend lessons for the next 2 years. He had already signed up a full complement of pupils for lessons for the entire period and paid the full rental in advance.

In March 2013, Sophie and her new partner Chris decided to buy an investment property. Sophie approached a local financier, Lightning Loans Ltd, for a sum of $500,000 to do so. Lightning Loans Ltd agreed to advance the money, in return for a mortgage over the Fannie Bay property. A mortgage agreement was drawn up between Sophie, Chris and Lightning Loans Ltd, detailing their obligations, the property to be mortgaged and the duration of the loan. They all signed it, and the money was advanced. Lightning Loans took possession of the title deeds, though the mortgage was not registered. Sophie made no mention of her arrangement with Dominic to have equal shares in the property.

In January 2014, Sophie and Dominic’s friend, Ollie offered them Sophie and Chris the opportunity of renting his Sydney harbourside townhouse while he was posted interstate on business for 3 years at a very modest rent. They decided to move and at the same time rent out the Fannie Bay house. They entered into an agreement to rent the property for 2 years to Molly. Rent was to be $2,000 a mont payable in advance. A deed of lease containing these terms was executed in February 2014. Molly and her family moved in immediately.

In March 2014, Sophie suffered some serious financial setbacks. The value of her share portfolio had dropped substantially, and she had to give up her job as a dentist because of failing health. With rising interest rates and little income, she decided to re-finance her properties. She takes out a further mortgage on the Fannie Bay property to Barry Blaster. Barry is an old friend of Sophie’s and tells her there’s no need to register the mortgage as she’s a good egg, but he has evidenced in the transaction in writing. He is unaware of the mortgage to Lightning Loans.

Discuss and explain your reasoning in relation to the following questions:

1) Can Greg continue to use the tennis court until November 2014? Why?

2) Can Molly remain in the house until February 2016? Why?

3) Have Sophie’s actions amounted to fraud? If so, what is the effect?

4) What is Dominic’s share in the house? Does your answer differ in law and equity? Why?

Assignment Task

Task

Hypothetical Questions:

Question 1.

In 2012, Sophie and Dominic buy a parcel of Torrens land in Fannie Bay, Darwin, for $750,000. The land comprised of a tennis court, which is surrounded by a tall wire fence, and a house with a large tropical garden. The purchase price of $750 000 was comprised of Sophie’s savings of $500,000, and her brother Dominic’s contribution of $250,000. The settlement occurred in March 2012, and the change in registered proprietor was registered on the title. For taxation reasons, Sophie’s name alone appeared on the transfer as purchaser. Sophie and Dominic had earlier orally agreed that Dominic (a former builder) would be housekeeper, would carry out some substantial renovations to the house, and would refurbish the tennis court to make it commercially viable. In return for these contributions (in addition to his financial contribution), they agreed he would get an equal share in the property.

In November 2012, the refurbishment and renovations were complete, and they entered into a licence agreement with Greg, a local tennis professional, to rent out the court for evening and weekend lessons for the next 2 years. He had already signed up a full complement of pupils for lessons for the entire period and paid the full rental in advance.

In March 2013, Sophie and her new partner Chris decided to buy an investment property. Sophie approached a local financier, Lightning Loans Ltd, for a sum of $500,000 to do so. Lightning Loans Ltd agreed to advance the money, in return for a mortgage over the Fannie Bay property. A mortgage agreement was drawn up between Sophie, Chris and Lightning Loans Ltd, detailing their obligations, the property to be mortgaged and the duration of the loan. They all signed it, and the money was advanced. Lightning Loans took possession of the title deeds, though the mortgage was not registered. Sophie made no mention of her arrangement with Dominic to have equal shares in the property.

In January 2014, Sophie and Dominic’s friend, Ollie offered them Sophie and Chris the opportunity of renting his Sydney harbourside townhouse while he was posted interstate on business for 3 years at a very modest rent. They decided to move and at the same time rent out the Fannie Bay house. They entered into an agreement to rent the property for 2 years to Molly. Rent was to be $2,000 a mont payable in advance. A deed of lease containing these terms was executed in February 2014. Molly and her family moved in immediately.

In March 2014, Sophie suffered some serious financial setbacks. The value of her share portfolio had dropped substantially, and she had to give up her job as a dentist because of failing health. With rising interest rates and little income, she decided to re-finance her properties. She takes out a further mortgage on the Fannie Bay property to Barry Blaster. Barry is an old friend of Sophie’s and tells her there’s no need to register the mortgage as she’s a good egg, but he has evidenced in the transaction in writing. He is unaware of the mortgage to Lightning Loans.

Discuss and explain your reasoning in relation to the following questions:

1) Can Greg continue to use the tennis court until November 2014? Why?

2) Can Molly remain in the house until February 2016? Why?

3) Have Sophie’s actions amounted to fraud? If so, what is the effect?

4) What is Dominic’s share in the house? Does your answer differ in law and equity? Why?

This LWZ223-Law Assignment has been solved by our Law Expert at TV Assignment Help. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing Style. Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turn tin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.

question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing Style. Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turn tin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.