If Teltra exercised the put during the first two years of the existence of the partnership, which it did, Telstra was entitled to a purchase price corresponding to the value of its capital account. The question of whether it was appropriate to “recognise” the value of Telstra`s balance of capital due to a decrease in the fair value of the undertaking was the subject of dispute. Under the terms of the partnership agreement, a “Book Down” was only triggered for certain events, one of which was a different capital injection. The Delaware Court of Chancery recently faced a variation from Mortgage 1 to Grove v. Brown, 2013 WL 4041495 (Del. Ch. August 8, 2013), and his answer to the above question probably has an impact on the response to mortgage 2. .