JB and George Fry worked as a plumber and laundryman, earning £1 a week.
But they had the reversion of their uncle's estate, subject to the life tenancy of their aunt.
They were advised by an inexperienced solicitor who also acted for Mr Lane.
Kay J cited two cases, Evans v Llewellin[1] and Haygarth v Wearing,[2] saying that equity most commonly interferes in favour of an expectant heir, in his youth, or "a poor man with imperfect education".
Where such circumstances are shown, the onus is on the purchaser to show it was "fair, just and reasonable" (Lord Selborne LC, Aylesford).