KI (Applicant husband) v SI (Respondent wife) (Sham trusts and intervenor proceedings in financial remedy claims)

KI (Applicant husband) v SI (Respondent wife) (Sham trusts and intervenor proceedings in financial remedy claims)

The DT1 trust deed in favour of JF is void and a sham as it does not reflect the true intentions of the parties and lacks evidential basis; IF has a beneficial interest in SDF under a valid trust (DT2), or alternatively by resulting or constructive trust, entitling him to repayment of £57,500 and 40% of the net sale proceeds, with the remainder split between W and H.

Parties
Wife/applicant: W; Husband/respondent: H; First Intervenor (w's Father): IF; Second Intervenor (w's Mother): JF
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Financial Remedies/trusts of Land / Preliminary Issue Hearing
Outcome
DT1 trust in favour of JF declared void and a sham; DT2 trust in favour of IF declared valid; beneficial interests in SDF apportioned as: IF to be repaid £57,500 and receive 40% of the remainder, W and H to receive 30% each; costs to be assessed, likely payable by W and JF to IF and H.
Legal Topics
Beneficial Ownership, Resulting Trust, Constructive Trust, Sham Trust, Rectification of Register, Declaration of Trust, Presumption of Advancement
Family Law Trusts Law Property Law Beneficial Ownership Resulting Trust Constructive Trust Sham Trust Rectification of Register +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

W

Wife/applicant

H

Husband/respondent

IF

First Intervenor (w's Father)

JF

Second Intervenor (w's Mother)

Procedural Posture

Financial Remedies/trusts of Land / Preliminary Issue Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Declaration of Trust (DT1) in favour of JF is valid or a sham
  2. 2 Whether IF has a beneficial interest in SDF and on what terms
  3. 3 Whether W and H hold beneficial interests in SDF and SF

Ratio Decidendi

The DT1 trust deed in favour of JF is void and a sham as it does not reflect the true intentions of the parties and lacks evidential basis; IF has a beneficial interest in SDF under a valid trust (DT2), or alternatively by resulting or constructive trust, entitling him to repayment of £57,500 and 40% of the net sale proceeds, with the remainder split between W and H.

Court Disposition

DT1 trust in favour of JF declared void and a sham; DT2 trust in favour of IF declared valid; beneficial interests in SDF apportioned as: IF to be repaid £57,500 and receive 40% of the remainder, W and H to receive 30% each; costs to be assessed, likely payable by W and JF to IF and H.

Orders

  • Declaration that DT1 trust in favour of JF is void and a sham
  • Declaration that DT2 trust in favour of IF is valid