Marr v Collie [2017] UKPC 17

Facts

• Marr v Collie concerned the ownership of properties in the Bahamas acquired during a cohabiting relationship.
• The properties consisted of both personal residences and commercial assets generating rental income and supporting business operations.
• The relationship between the parties encompassed elements of both domestic cohabitation and joint business ventures.
• There were no clear written agreements specifying ownership shares of the mixed-use properties.
• Both parties made financial and non-financial contributions, including payments for acquisition, mortgage repayments, and active management of business and rental properties.
• A dispute arose regarding the beneficial ownership proportions of these mixed-use properties.

Issues

1. Whether resulting and constructive trust principles apply to properties used for both personal and commercial purposes in a cohabiting relationship.
2. How the court should determine beneficial ownership when properties acquired during a relationship are used for mixed domestic and business purposes.
3. Whether the presumption of resulting trust is displaced in non-domestic contexts, or if parties’ intentions and contributions must always be examined.

Decision

• The Privy Council held that resulting and constructive trust principles are not limited to purely domestic property disputes and can be applied to mixed-use (personal and business) properties.
• The court determined that a fact-sensitive inquiry into the parties' intentions and contributions—both financial and non-financial—is essential to establishing beneficial ownership in such cases.
• The presumption of resulting trust is not automatically inapplicable in non-domestic contexts; each case must be evaluated on its unique circumstances.
• In this instance, evidence showed that the parties intended to share beneficial ownership, as reflected in their joint management and financial arrangements regarding the properties.

Legal Principles

• Resulting trusts arise where property is transferred without consideration, subject to evidence of a contrary intention; this is not confined to domestic scenarios.
• Constructive trusts may be imposed by the court based on parties’ conduct, to prevent unjust enrichment.
• Non-financial contributions, such as labor and management, can be relevant in determining beneficial interest in mixed-use property.
• The presumption of resulting trust and the analysis of parties' intentions and contributions must be applied flexibly, regardless of whether property use is domestic, commercial, or both.

Conclusion

Marr v Collie [2017] UKPC 17 broadened the application of resulting and constructive trust doctrines, requiring courts to analyze both financial and non-financial contributions along with intentions in mixed-use property disputes stemming from cohabiting relationships and joint ventures, rather than limiting such analysis to purely domestic contexts.