Banner Homes Group plc v Luff Developments Ltd [2000] Ch 372

Facts

  • Banner Homes Group plc and Luff Developments Ltd agreed to collaborate on acquiring and developing a property.
  • No formal written agreement existed setting out their respective rights and obligations.
  • Banner Homes alleged Luff Developments excluded it from the project after the property was acquired.
  • Banner Homes claimed a constructive trust had arisen, asserting a beneficial interest in the property based on the common intention to share and Banner Homes’ detrimental reliance.
  • Luff Developments denied the existence of a constructive trust, arguing absence of a formal agreement and sufficient evidence of common intention.

Issues

  1. Whether a constructive trust could arise in the context of a joint venture without a formal written agreement.
  2. Whether there was sufficient evidence of a common intention between the parties to share the property.
  3. Whether Banner Homes had relied to its detriment on the common intention such that it would be unconscionable for Luff Developments to deny Banner Homes' beneficial interest.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal held that a constructive trust may be imposed in joint venture situations where there is clear evidence of a common intention to share property.
  • It was found that Banner Homes and Luff Developments had established a common intention regarding the property.
  • Banner Homes had relied on this understanding and acted to its detriment by contributing to acquisition and development.
  • The court determined it would be unconscionable for Luff Developments to deny Banner Homes’ beneficial interest in the property.
  • Accordingly, a constructive trust was imposed in favour of Banner Homes.

Legal Principles

  • Constructive trusts arise by operation of law and are imposed to prevent unjust enrichment where it is unconscionable for one party to retain property to the exclusion of another.
  • In joint ventures, a constructive trust requires demonstration of a common intention (which may be inferred from conduct) and detrimental reliance by the claimant.
  • The conduct of parties, their shared understanding, and reliance are central to establishing such trusts in equity.
  • The absence of a formal agreement does not preclude the imposition of a constructive trust if the equitable elements are present.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal in Banner Homes Group plc v Luff Developments Ltd [2000] Ch 372 confirmed that a constructive trust can arise in joint venture cases without a written agreement where common intention and detrimental reliance are established, ensuring equity provides a remedy against unjust enrichment in property disputes.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal