Kucukkoylu v Ozcan: QBD 30 Jun 2014

The parties disputed entitlement to the proceeds of a winning Euromillions lottery ticket. The defendant had told the claimant that he had dreamed that the claimant would win the lottery. The defendant bought tickets for which the claimant paid in cash from the till at the restaurant he part owned. The claimant chose the numbers, but the defendant rewrote them on the tickets and took them to the shop.
Held: For the Defendant to succeed he would effectively have to prove that a contract existed with the Claimant for the purchase of a lottery ticket jointly and that the terms of the contract would give rise either expressly or impliedly to an equal share of the beneficial interest, in the form of the prize money. Though the witness evidence was generally unimpressive, there was objective evidence, and: ‘ the effect of these conversations was that the Claimant and Defendant entered into a contract to jointly play the lottery on an equal basis. I find that either it was a term of the contract that any winnings should be shared equally or alternatively that such a term should be implied. I find that this term represents the obvious, but unexpressed intention of the parties and that it is also necessary to give business efficacy to the contract. The whole point of playing the lottery jointly is to hopefully share the winnings jointly. The phrase ’50/50’ or ‘half and half’ both of which the Defendant repeated several times in his evidence were clearly intended to convey an equal right to the beneficial interest in any winnings. It follows from my findings of both fact and law that the Defendant succeeds in this case. There should be a declaration that the prize money from this winning lottery ticket should be shared equally between the Claimant and the Defendant.’

Judges:

Gosnell HHJ

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 1972 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.534044