In an application over beneficial ownership of residential land, the applicant alleged an oral trust arrangement under which the respondent held legal title for the applicant's benefit.
The court found on the evidence that both periods of title holding reflected the same trust-based understanding, and rejected the respondent's position that the later arrangement was a true landlord-tenant relationship.
Although a bare trust in land failed for lack of writing under the Statute of Frauds, the court held a constructive trust could be imposed to prevent inequitable reliance on statutory formalities.
Declarations were granted confirming beneficial ownership and entitlement to conveyance on demand, subject to payment of specified ownership-related obligations including the down payment and interest.
