$[$Note: Your instructor may assign this case as a Shared Writing activity.$]$

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 neme. 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. Would it

affect your answer if Bill did more work than Doug? If the value of the

licence was over $$800000$ at the time they stopped fishing together, what

would Doug be entitled to if successful, given that the trial took place in

$2012?$ a$.$ What are the facts in both cases?

b$.$ Identify the legislations related to the cases.

c$.$ What legal questions are the key determining factors in both cases?

d$.$ Justify your answer to the legal questions you have identified.

e$.$ Persuade the editor by providing facts to support the argument.