Paid Each Trimester - Divided Equally between Bettina and Arnold - Law Assignment Help

Assignment Task :

Bettina purchased a TattsLotto ticket and, on 14 January 2020, was informed that she had won $300,000! She decided to share this prize with her business partner, Arnold, on the following basis:

• the prize money would be divided equally between Bettina and Arnold; and

• from his share of the prize money, Arnold would set aside the sum of $50,000 to help Charlene (a close friend of Bettina) pay her university fees when such fees became due to be paid each trimester.

Bettina informed Arnold that she wanted to help Charlene, as she was parenting young children alone, working at two part-time jobs, and attempting to complete a Law degree.

Arnold agreed to the division of the prize money on this basis. Arnold and Bettina consulted a firm of solicitors who prepared a formal contract that set out the above agreement. Both Arnold and Bettina signed this contract on 20 January 2020.

On learning of this agreement, Charlene told Bettina that she was extremely grateful, as it would enable her to give up one of her jobs so she could devote more time to her studies.

Bettina had been saving up to buy an apartment and she decided to put her $150,000 towards the purchase of a property that she had seen advertised for sale. On 30 January 2020, Bettina contacted the real estate agent, Debra, and offered to buy the apartment for $500,000. Debra indicated that the vendor would accept that price, provided that Bettina paid the vendor $90,000 within the month – $30,000 by 11 February 2020, a further $30,000 by 19 February 2020, and the final $30,000 by 28 February – and the balance of the purchase price by 1 April 2020. A formal written agreement setting out these terms was signed by Bettina and the vendor.

Bettina paid $30,000 to the vendor on 11 February 2020. On 20 February 2020, another real estate agent, Elliott, telephoned Bettina and told her that an apartment that Bettina had inspected had been passed in at auction and the vendor would accept $400,000 for it. Bettina preferred this property, so she immediately contacted Debra and informed her that she would no longer be proceeding with the contract for the purchase of the apartment. Debra said that the vendor would insist on Bettina paying the sum of $30,000, which had become due on 19 February 2020. 

Arnold decided to spend his portion of the winnings on a yacht, a new car and several overseas holidays. 

Arnold saw an advertisement posted online by ‘Maritime Goods’ for a second-hand yacht for sale for $60,000. Thinking that the yacht was very attractive and had perfect dimensions, Arnold decided to buy it. Arnold intended to enjoy the yacht for two years, then sell it and use the proceeds to help pay for the costs of his new car and holidays.

Arnold went into Maritime Goods on 5 March 2020 and told Fabian, the owner of the store, that he wanted to buy the yacht. Fabian said that Arnold had a good eye and that he had inherited the boat from a distant relative who told him that it had won the Sydney to Hobart yacht race in 2000! Arnold thought that this fact greatly increased the value of the yacht and guaranteed that he would be able to re-sell it for the purchase price. Arnold bought the yacht that day.

On 14 March 2020, while Arnold was at the marina preparing to sail his yacht, he chatted to Georgia, another boat owner, and boasted about the low price he had paid for a yacht that had won the Sydney to Hobart race. Very knowledgeable about boats and the race, Georgia confirmed that Arnold’s yacht had not won that race and, in fact, had come last! Georgia thought that Arnold’s yacht was worth around $20,000.

Arnold immediately telephoned Fabian, conveyed the information that Georgia had told him, and asked for his money back. Fabian refused this request, saying that he had had no reason to suspect that his relative’s information was incorrect.

Arnold then telephoned Bettina and told her that, unfortunately, he had overpaid for the yacht and had effectively lost $40,000. He therefore would need to take back $40,000 of the money he had set aside to pay for Charlene’s university fees. Both Bettina and Charlene were extremely upset about this development and thought that Arnold’s decision was unfair.

Answer the following questions, assuming the above facts took place in Victoria:

1. Would Bettina be able to recover the $30,000 that she paid to the vendor on 11 February 2020 for the apartment? 

2. Is Bettina obliged to pay the vendor the further $30,000 that was due to be paid by 19 February 2020?

3. Identify and discuss ALL the possible grounds upon which Arnold might be able to rely so that he can return the yacht to Fabian, receive a refund of the purchase price and recover damages. Your answer must include a discussion of whether or not Arnold will be successful on all of these grounds 

4. Advise Arnold, Bettina and Charlene of their rights and obligations with respect to Arnold’s decision not to set aside $40,000 to pay Charlene’s university fees 

This Law Assignment has been solved by our Law Experts at onlineassignmentbank. 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 Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.