Shi v Ou

The case of Shi v Ou involved a dispute between the parents and their daughter and her partner over a property held in joint names. The parents sought to enforce a judgment debt against one third of the net proceeds of sale of the property, arguing that their daughter's partner held his interest in trust for them by oral declaration of trust. The partner had been removed from the title to the property following a judgment obtained against him and his partner. The court had to determine whether the moneys provided to the daughter and her partner constituted a gift or a loan, and whether the partner held his interest in trust for his parents by oral declaration of trust. The court also had to consider whether raising the need for writing under section 23C(1)(b) of the Conveyancing Act 1919 would amount to a cloaking of a fraud.
The court found that the moneys provided to the daughter and her partner were a loan and not a gift, as there was no intention to make an immediate and unconditional transfer of ownership. The court also found that the partner did not hold his interest in trust for his parents by oral declaration of trust, as there was no evidence of an intention to create a trust. The court held that the partner's removal from the title to the property did not affect the equitable interests of the parties, and that the judgment debt could be enforced against one third of the net proceeds of sale of the property. The court held that the raising of the need for writing under section 23C(1)(b) of the Conveyancing Act 1919 would not amount to a cloaking of a fraud, as the partner had not acted fraudulently in removing the need for writing.

The final orders of the court were that the parents' claim for a declaration that the partner held his interest in trust for them by oral declaration of trust was dismissed, and that the judgment debt could be enforced against one third of the net proceeds of sale of the property. The court also ordered that the partner pay the parents' costs of the proceedings.