Little v Saunders

Little and Saunders were a de facto couple who purchased a house with unequal contributions towards the purchase price. The dispute arose as to whether the presumption of a resulting trust could be rebutted and whether a constructive trust arose. The court was required to determine these legal issues. The court held that the presumption of a resulting trust was not rebutted and that a constructive trust did not arise. The court based its reasoning on the evidence presented and the applicable legal principles. The court also considered the issue of costs, determining that an indemnity costs order should not be made on the basis of an offer of compromise or a Calderbank letter. The final orders of the court were that the presumption of a resulting trust was not rebutted and that a constructive trust did not arise. The court also ordered that no indemnity costs order should be made on the basis of an offer of compromise or a Calderbank letter.