Ann Nilsson & Anor v Mohammad Babar Iqbal & Anor
[2024] EWHC 49 (Ch)
The Estate of Nafisa Hasan (deceased) v Digit Limited (in liquidation) & Anor
14 May 2024
[2024] EWHC 1127 (Ch)
High Court
A woman's estate claimed ownership of a house bought by her husband and registered in a company's name. Because the husband promised her the house and she acted on that promise by moving to London and improving the property, and because the company offered no proof of its own claim, the court ruled the house belonged to the woman's estate.
Key Facts
- •Nafisa Hasan (deceased) claimed beneficial ownership of a London property legally owned by Digit Limited (in liquidation).
- •The property was purchased in 1998 by Colonel Hasan, Nafisa's husband, using funds from Integral Resources, a company where Nafisa was a director and shareholder.
- •The property was registered in Digit Limited's name, allegedly to maintain discretion.
- •Nafisa consistently asserted her beneficial ownership in various prior legal proceedings.
- •Digit Limited did not defend the claim, and the liquidators confirmed they lacked relevant information.
- •EFG Private Bank (Channel Islands) Limited held a charge on the property.
Legal Principles
Extrinsic evidence is admissible to prove a trust to prevent the use of statute as an instrument of fraud (Rochefoucauld v Boustead).
Rochefoucauld v Boustead [1897] 1 Ch 196
Declarations of trust respecting land must be manifested and proved by writing (s. 53(1)(b) Law of Property Act 1925).
Law of Property Act 1925, s. 53(1)(b)
Resulting, implied, or constructive trusts are not affected by the writing requirement (s. 53(2) Law of Property Act 1925).
Law of Property Act 1925, s. 53(2)
A constructive trust can arise from an express common intention, even without detrimental reliance (Lloyds Bank plc v Rossett).
Lloyds Bank plc v Rossett [1991] 1 AC 107
Detriment in proprietary estoppel is not narrowly defined and can include non-financial elements (Hudson v Hathway).
Hudson v Hathway [2023] KB 345
Silence in the face of evidence may convert that evidence into proof, especially in family disputes concerning property (Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd).
Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34
Outcomes
Nafisa Hasan was the beneficial owner of the property.
The court found a resulting and/or constructive trust based on the agreement between Nafisa and Colonel Hasan, Nafisa's detrimental reliance (foregoing profits from Integral Resources, moving to the UK, property refurbishment), and the lack of evidence from Digit to the contrary.