breach of legal document resulting in theft/fraud - how far could the guilty party fight?

[loversandstrangers]

I'd really appreciate if someone could offer any insight here. I'll try to keep it simple. Let's say two people - Jack and Jill - have a very simple and clear signed agreement saying 'if we sell this asset, we must both agree on the sale price in advance and then split the proceeds.'

Jack then goes behind Jill's back, sells the asset at a price only he approved, then pockets the cash.

Jill's lawyers (from a tier one firm) send a letter saying Jack has breached the contract. Jack's lawyer (a barely solvent one man band) send a letter essentially saying 'fuck you, we will fight you.'

The breach of a very clear agreement has been described as an 'open and shut' by every single qualified lawyer who has looked at this. But my question is, how long could Jack come back with nonsense and try to fight? If he is clearly in the wrong, and could end up going to prison if he doesn't co-operate, surely any lawyer (even a shit one) will advise against it?

He could fight it all the way (trial - you probably are looking at 2023 for that at least even if you issue ASAP). Appeal the decision. Make various applications. Make up lies: his signature was forged on the original agreement, he was coerced into signing the agreement, the agreement was frustrated for some reason…

I understand the points about civil versus criminal...but if you take money you legally owe someone, that is theft, no?

Arrogance plays a large part and as for lawyers well, as long as it's legal and the client is paying then 🤷‍♀️ they may well say you can't win this but if the client wants to try you'll find they'll take the money and give it a go, maybe hoping they can convince the other party they don't have a chance.

Op in terms of lawyer advising, they will have advised but if they are being privately paid and they are instructed to continue they will. As long as a client isn’t asking you to do something illegal or puts you in breach of professional obligations you continue with the case.

I have told clients they will lose at trial. They have still said they want to fight for a myriad of reasons.

Legal as in the lawyer is not themselves acting illegally.
Even guilty people are entitled to legal representation in all courts.

Have you reported to the police? Very difficult for anyone to say here if any crime has been committed (and I would have expected your lawyers to say if there was), but be warned the police may say it’s a “civil dispute”.

How much was the item worth?
Small claims court ? I believe the cap is currently £10 k so possibly this would cover half value as only half the money is in dispute

@Rosemaryandlemon - hmmm, possible. But alongside signed agreement, there is a wealth of emails and messages stating the same 'our agreement is X'. It would be impossible to go for 'under duress' or anything here.

@nottoplan - worth a lot more than 10K!

OP people still argue even with clear evidence. I had one client who was caught on cctv somewhere he said he wasn’t, he told me it wasn’t him and it was fake/ CGI. The Judge surprisingly didn’t accept this evidence…

History of the piece sold might even affect things was the item jacks solely at any point in time? Fancy car/boat/plane?
Emails could be seen as badgering and still agreed upon under duress.

You just have to sue him. Unless he stole the item from you its not criminal. He has breached a contract.

@femfemlicious - he sold a shared asset without agreement and then took all the proceeds, surely that IS stealing?

Its a civil matter. Its not a clear cut case of stealing. The police cannot decipher who legally owns the property. The police cannot enforce a contract. Its somethi g a judge has to adjudicate on

You can try reporting it to the police , i could be wrong

I think its breach of contract, if Jack rightfully had the item in his possession when he sold it then the 'crime' falls to the breach of contract (agreed price, split profit). The only way to win (maybe) is to get a court judgement in your favour as fast and cheap as possible, because costs will eat into what is available for you, and the lawyers will be paid first.

If its as open & shut as you say, ask your lawyer about this:
hallellis.co.uk/summary-judgment-applications-defences/

It's a civil matter, not criminal. The only way to find out how far he will go is to start proceedings (after following the relevant pre-action protocol).

A lawyer will advise a client on their chances of success and legal consequences of a particular course of action. The client will then instruct their lawyer, either following the advice, ignoring the advice, or somewhere in the middle.

Is there proof it was shared?

Is there evidence of who bought/inherited the item?

it's not clear cut at all sorry.

It’s civil; from what you’ve said. There’s no clear-cut theft because the theft claim comes from a contract breach, and that’s civil.

So you’d sue him. It’d likely go to trial late next year, or 2023, given the backlogs. There would be mediation opportunities beforehand, but to answer your question - it’s likely that you need to prepare for him to fight it all the way. Plenty of people do, and he won’t struggle to find a solicitor who will represent him if he’s happy to pay them, even if he has a small chance of success. He’d probably find someone to represent him even with no chance of success.

You’d need to evaluate whether he has assets other than the item, or whether he could be attempting to waste the disputed money on legal fees. If he has no assets, enforcing an order against him will be frustrating. But that might not be a concern if there’s a lot of money involved, or he has other assets too.

He sounds like a knob, but I’d prepare for him to fight this for as long as possible.

IAAL.

It is really not clear whether this is a civil or criminal matter. There are myriad factors that affect such a determination and we are being given very little insight.

There is no harm in contacting police if you think property had been stolen from you.

Regarding breach of contract it’s going to cost you a lot of time and money.

[quote loversandstrangers]@femfemlicious - he sold a shared asset without agreement and then took all the proceeds, surely that IS stealing?[/quote]
On the information you have posted here, I would say that is a breach of contract. However, it is impossible to say without full information. Even if it does constitute theft, there is no guarantee the police would get involved. I suspect they would say this is a civil matter.

But I guess, if someone doesn't have a hope in hell of winning, to what extent would they keep fighting? If it's absolutely obvious that a person will lose should something go as far as court, would any lawyer (even a crap one) advise a client to keep disputing?

If it is clear that Jack has no chance of winning, his lawyer will advise him appropriately. However, that doesn't mean Jack will accept this advice. If Jack wishes to continue fighting despite the lawyer's advice, his lawyer will continue to represent him. So no-one can say to what extent Jack will keep on fighting.

If Jack wishes to continue fighting despite the lawyer's advice, his lawyer will continue to represent him.

Agree - as long as Jack can pay, which presumably he can

There are a few mechanisms built into the court system which Jill might be able to use to prevent or discourage Jack fighting it all the way to trial.

First, if Jill does have to take Jack to court (ie he won’t settle without court proceedings), she can apply quite early on for summary judgment or to strike out Jack’s defence.

Second, Jill can make a costs protective offer to settle. If Jack refuses the offer and fights, but then loses, he’ll have to pay not only what he owes under the contract but also a bunch of extras.

Also yes it!s a civil matter

If you have a contract to pay your builder and you don’t pay your builder, that’s not theft. It’s breach of contract