PROBLEM FOR ANALYSIS
Bill and Ben were brothers who together purchased a property, each contributing half the purchase price. The title to the property was however solely in Bill’s name. They lived together in the property for 3 years, each contributing equally to the outgoings in relation to it. At the end of three years they had a falling out. Bill threatened to forcibly remove Ben from the house unless he left, and when Ben did leave Bill had the locks changed so that Ben could not re-enter. That was four years ago.
Since that time Bill has occupied the property by himself, apart from a period when he let a room to his friend Zak. With the $3,000 proceeds from this rent Bill erected a fence around the property. This is estimated to have increased the value of the property by $2,000. He has also paid the whole of the Council rates and other charges in relation to the property for that period, in the total amount of $5,000. Bill has now had a very attractive offer from someone to buy the property. The proposed price is $650,000.
Ben claims if the property is sold, he is entitled to at least half of the sale price but Bill disagrees.

1. Explain
a) why Ben might be entitled to some of the proceeds
b) how the amount would be calculated if he was so entitled.
75% of total marks

2. Assume the above scenario with the following changes.
The title to the property is in both names. Not long after he left the property, Ben is killed in a road accident. Bill claims that the property is owned as a joint tenancy but Ben’s executor claims it is a tenancy in common and this was inadvertently left off the title.
a) Explain the difference between the two types of ownership and
b) discuss the criteria Bill will have to prove, for a joint tenancy to exist.