___

P and D were former friends who worked together on software they used to place bets on horse-racing.

They shared the profits, in the form of gambling returns, in various proportions over time.

The relationship broke down. P sought to recover from D $870K he said he was entitled to as a partner.

A partnership is relevantly defined as a relationship between "persons carrying on a business in common with a view of profit”: [105]

Noting the venture relied on "chance… as a predominant ingredient", the Court considered it was not a "business", and so not a partnership: [114]

However, if the venture was a business, it was not a partnership for a number of reasons: [115]

Those reasons included: (i) an important part of the software was used by D with no intention of sharing with any other, aside from the discrete way he shared it with P, (ii) P undertook work at D's request and was paid, (iii) there was no legal obligation for P or D to continue the work they were doing, (iv) there was a power imbalance between P and D such that D controlled access to software, servers, and the relevant bank account, and (v) despite saying he was unpaid, P actually received $428K over the venture: [116]

P's application failed: [129]