Equity Law - Gabriel Properties - Essay Example

Equity Law Course Lecturer Date In this case the consideration of legal positions are established by legally recognizable documents such as written agreements, and acceptable oral undertakings such as those categorized under the will like nuncupative or reciprocal/ husband and wife will. In strictest sense, testaments are limited to personal property unlike the will which covers real property. These are required to be established in certain degree for the transfer of Gabriel properties. The surviving spouse is the next of kin whose husband had the intention for partnership and who assumes the right to inherit the estates as per the law of descent and distribution (Shah, Truog, and Miller, p.719). Any requirement for provision of information may be tricky as the husband had not drafted the arrangements or informed the relevant parties of his intentions. However, there is less need for recognition that the wife is designated by the decease as the next of kin. The parties which were involved with Gabriel have legal obligations and some considerations in order design the transfer of such rights without any legal arrangements from Gabriel guiding such undertakings. Any agreement settled and reached by parties’ decision is subject to usual contract law. Anneka Rowan whom Gabriel had lent $50,000 has the terms of loan embodied in the written agreement. The inter alia, stating that the loan has no fixed term, is interest-free and Anneka has the right to pay off the loan wholly or partly at any time. The loan was transferred to the wife at $40,000 without any written arrangement which half the amount transferred ($25,000) is further transferred by the wife to Ezy factoring for $20,000 and evidenced by the simple handwritten transfer note. The law of contract establishes a legal contract reached out by two or more parties as a voluntary act who also acts willingly. This creates legal obligations between the parties. The terms of what should or should not occur are clear for the agreement between Gabriel and Anneka. The time and duration of payment was not specified and so are the installment rates of repayment. This leaves Anneka with autonomy of deciding when and how to remit the loan. The critical thing is that this may not be fully understood by the Enzy who has the right of half the amount lent to Anneka. Anneka has the rights to settle a new deal with Enzy or follow the first agreement with Gabriel. Enzy may make application within a certain time and limit the circumstances of extended duration to pay. The court can then order regular repayment by Anneka. Equity may impute intent in fulfilling an obligation (DiMatteo, p.280). This means that the general obligation of the first agreement will be considered sufficient unless Anneka opt for perfect performance as an exercise of option. Anneka has the stronger hand in the deal and has full right to request for legal remedy or judicial relief. The transfer has not been known to Anneka and she might sue the parties, Tegan and Ezy in case they come up with new resettlement arrangements. In legal framework, a transfer should be conducted in full awareness of the parties who had entered the first agreement. Anneka will renew the agreement for arrangements of new terms limited or optionally open to new terms with both Tegan and Ezy factoring. Gabriel had extensive share portfolio including 2,000 shares in Errata Mining Pty Limited. The declared share dividend $5.00 per share had not yet been paid at Gabriel death. He had the intention of all giving all income he derives from the dividend to the wife. As there are no written arrangements, this is a proof in tracing claim without real evidentially principles. This is in accordance to the equitable remedies where without following rigidly the common law as stipulated in writing of agreement, it is expected that in cases of a wife and a husband, some matters are deliberated without formal proceedings to follow in a the court of law. The wife can claim the dividend income and continue to receive the funds through offering a reasonable explanation of oral agreement, her husband’s intention. The legal authority in such a case will use reasonable inferences and commonsense as a way to find the ownership of unexplained assets and proceed in giving her the rights. Errata for that matter are entitled to pay the income to the wife. Gabriel was a successful partner in Pronk Legal. Partnership law recognizes the for-profit business association. Each partner share profits directly, control business operations and all the parties are independently and jointly liable for debts. The purpose to create, organize and dissolve partnership is governed by the law which is enshrined under Uniform Partnership Act. The intentions, profit los sharing, joint control and administration of business operations, each partner’s capital investment and the common property ownership confirms the existence of partnership. In this case, the death of a partner, Gabriel poses some vulnerability to Pronk Legal. This is because general partnership is meant to dissolve in case a partner dies, withdraws or retires. However, for limited partnership death and withdrawal cannot affect the firm stability. The laws which govern partnership agreement however contain provisions which can be followed to continue the operations of Pronk legal. One of the possible provisions that they may follow is make allowance for buy-out of Gabriel share by another partner if this is settled with the wife. The transfer of ownership is dependent on owner’s agreement. Uniform Partnership Act has stipulated a transfer of ownership with the consent of all the other members (Smolensky, p.12). Once again, Tegan, the wife will be consulted for such an arrangement to settle the partnership claims that may arise and clear any arising liabilities. Such a stand will be taken as the profit is earned through legal practice and not on general investments on product which would ensure transferable partnership rights to Tegan. Pronk Legal is held up by their established, current and future relationship with their clients and this might make it hard to dissolve the partnership. Such obligations enforce consideration of all the aspects which on a balance would promote sustenance of the firm. Pronk‟s Practice Package (PPP) has been negotiated and Gabriel granted its license to Smart Legal Solutions Pty Limited (SLS). SLS has to produce and market PPP for a royalty of 10% in return to Gabriel from the gross sale price of PPP copies in the preceding month. Such an undertaking has many drawbacks, as the package was not specified on a certain amount of money but the parties mutually agreed to for percentage shares in the following sales. Simply, with the agreement designed, Tegan will have to follow the terms and access the income as agreed with SLS. By the virtue of her status as a wife to Gabriel, she will inherit the personal property which belonged to the husband and also assume all the interests derived from the SLS agreement. This meant an entitlement to long-life interest as SLS cannot get lid of the agreement unless they settle for another benefit or buy the ownership at an agreed amount of money settled by a second agreement (Elliott and Quinn, p.30). Otherwise, SLS should continue to sell the product following the nature of agreement and ensure goodwill is passed in accordance to the terms of the agreement. The right of ownership is transferrable without any change of terms contained in the first agreement. Tegan would not invoke new terms whatsoever in this agreement to favor her interest since the contract was agreed upon after considerations. However, any thought to change the terms can affect SLS capacity which can ends up putting the deal in jeopardy (Geis, p.3). If Tegan considers to enter another deal with a new company who might sell the PPP at a near, faster and better payments share, a revocation is allowed. However, the offer cannot be revoked for a period extending to 90 days after both Tagan and SLS agree in writing to keep assurance open. If it is all possible that they cannot perform well at any near date, the insecure party, Tegan would request for assurance from SLS before further performance. Any other negotiation which is mutually agreed between the parties can establish new agreement after which the former is dissolved such as when the company may settle for lump sum payment and thereafter own fully the PPP software. Contract law governing sales requires any sale that exceeds $500 be settled on a written agreement. Ezy factoring purchase of the $25,000 loan at $20,000 has been evidenced by the simple handwritten transfer note. The document secures the agreement and makes it binding. The risks that may arise from the transfer from Anneka to Tagan and finally to Ezy will in this case be considered as Tegan’s. Ezy may demand equity to intervene over the resettlement arrangements which would reduce the autonomy under the first agreement. The new agreement would be considered if Ezy shows the degree of harm that such autonomy may cause toward them. The court would possibly award such equity as the party intent and consent were limited when the agreement was set (Keller, Feng, Wang, p.11). References DiMatteo, Larry A. "Policing Limited Liability Companies Under Contract Law." American Business Law Journal 46.2 (2009): 279-310. Elliott, Catherine, and Frances Quinn. Contract law. Longman, 2007. Geis, George. "Automating Contract Law." New York University Law Review (2008). Keller, L. Robin, Tianjun Feng, and Yitong Wang. "Measures of risk equity." Wiley Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science (2010). Shah, Seema K., Robert D. Truog, and Franklin G. Miller. "Death and legal fictions." Journal of Medical Ethics 37.12 (2011): 719-722. Smolensky, Kirsten. "Rights of the Dead." Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper 06-27 (2009). Read More