Doug and Bill Tremblett were brothers and, at least in the early stages, owned a fishing boat together. The brothers worked together in the fishing operation from 1988 to 2004 using a crab licence that Bill had acquired through a swap and that was held in his own name. The crab fishing licence was the primary asset of the business and the main subject matter of the dispute. After the brothers stopped working together Bill continued on with the fishing enterprise, relying on the crab licence he had obtained. Explain any claim Doug might have against Bill in this situation. If the value of the licence was over $800,000 at the time they stopped fishing together, what would Doug be entitled to if successful given the trial took place in 2012?