9 John owned some land he wanted to develop by building cheap low rise housing on. He joined forces with Mary who is an experienced developer and Fred who has considerable experience in marketing residential property. John, Mary and Fred never get around to drawing up a written agreement but they each verbally agree on the defined roles they will each have. The three were old school friends and so they trusted each other implicitly. After the project has been going for 18 months and the houses are ready to come to market, John and Mary get together to sideline Fred and bring in a new marketing person. They tell Fred they are not going to pay him any anything because there was never any written agreement. They further say that he has never contributed any money, although he has spent at least 1000 hours working on preliminary marketing. Which statement most closely describes the legal position: Because of the trust and confidence the parties placed in each other and their informal understanding to work towards a common objective, the court would find that there was a joint venture. As such, the court would impose a fiduciary obligation on John and Mary of loyalty and find that, in kicking Fred out, John and Mary were in breach of that fiduciary obligation. Because of the trust and confidence the parties placed in each other and their informal understanding to work towards a common objective, the court would find that there was a joint venture. However, joint venture is still a contract because the parties never discussed what would happen in the event of a breach, the court would not impose its own view of what the parties intended. On that basis Fred would have no remedy. Fred could bring a claim that he was an employee of John and Mary. As such he could file a claim in the Employment Relations Authority for unpaid wages. The courts will not write contracts for parties where the parties have themselves chosen not to prepare a written contract, especially in a commercial situation where parties should be sophisticated enough to know that they need to get legal advice and record their agreement in writing. Fred has no remedy here. Reset Maximum marks: 2.5 9 John owned some land he wanted to develop by building cheap low rise housing on. He joined forces with Mary who is an experienced developer and Fred who has considerable experience in marketing residential property. John, Mary and Fred never get around to drawing up a written agreement but they each verbally agree on the defined roles they will each have. The three were old school friends and so they trusted each other implicitly. After the project has been going for 18 months and the houses are ready to come to market, John and Mary get together to sideline Fred and bring in a new marketing person. They tell Fred they are not going to pay him any anything because there was never any written agreement. They further say that he has never contributed any money, although he has spent at least 1000 hours working on preliminary marketing. Which statement most closely describes the legal position: Because of the trust and confidence the parties placed in each other and their informal understanding to work towards a common objective, the court would find that there was a joint venture. As such, the court would impose a fiduciary obligation on John and Mary of loyalty and find that, in kicking Fred out, John and Mary were in breach of that fiduciary obligation. Because of the trust and confidence the parties placed in each other and their informal understanding to work towards a common objective, the court would find that there was a joint venture. However, joint venture is still a contract because the parties never discussed what would happen in the event of a breach, the court would not impose its own view of what the parties intended. On that basis Fred would have no remedy. Fred could bring a claim that he was an employee of John and Mary. As such he could file a claim in the Employment Relations Authority for unpaid wages. The courts will not write contracts for parties where the parties have themselves chosen not to prepare a written contract, especially in a commercial situation where parties should be sophisticated enough to know that they need to get legal advice and record their agreement in writing. Fred has no remedy here. Reset Maximum marks: 2.5