The applicants sought a declaration that residential property registered in their adult son's name was beneficially theirs, relying primarily on resulting trust and alternatively on express trust, unjust enrichment, and adverse possession.
The court held that the presumption of resulting trust arising from the gratuitous 1990 transfer was rebutted on the evidence, finding that a gift to the son was more plausible than a bare trustee arrangement and rejecting the current denials of gifting intention as unreliable.
However, the court found that the son's 2014 affidavits and consent created an express trust in favour of the applicants from August 20, 2014 onward.
Title was vested in the applicants subject to enforcement of the former spouse's registered family law judgment to the extent outstanding as of that date, with no costs awarded.
