Many thanks for your answer.
Venture 1 is between our two Limited Companies covered by an MOU. At the time the MOU was signed, the idea that they may lay claim to had not been thought of. However, it was being progressed before my partner in venture 1 became a director of venture 2. Again, we have emails between us which evidences this.
With regards to overlap. Venture 1 utilises mobile app technology. Venture 2 has also carried out paid work to develop a mobile app. The two apps are in different market sectors and none of the software code has crossed between the two ventures.
Could you explain what fiduciary duties are please. The director that indicated there may be a claim, stated that he thought we had developed venture 1 'on venture 2's time'.
Many thanks, this is becoming clearer.
There is a final piece of this that is concerning me. Yesterday, the director of venture 2 who stated he may lay a claim to venture 1, has endorsed that my business partner for venture one and I, may work entirely on venture 1 for the next 6 months, whilst the other 2 directors work entirely on venture 2.
Do you think, by endorsing and encouraging us to do this, it is an attempt by him to strengthen his claim on a share of venture 1?
If you do, what course of action do you recommend? I would rather resign from venture 2, than risk strengthening his claim to venture 1 by me working on venture 1 for the next 6 months, whilst still being a part of venture 2. Or should we get the other venture 1 directors to sign something which states that venture 1 pre-existed and they can lay no claim to any part of it?
One last thing which may be important. The 3rd venture 2 director involved in this, said yesterday that he knew 'venture 1 was not venture 2's idea and that it pre-dated my venture 1 partner becoming a director of venture 2. There were no witnesses to this statement, however I immediately recorded exactly what was said, signed it and emailed the statement to myself to record what was said by whom and when.