Ong v Ping [2017] EWCA Civ 2069

Facts

  • The dispute concerned the beneficial ownership of a London property purchased in 2007 for £1.2 million, with legal title registered solely in the name of Mr. Ping.
  • Ms. Ong, the appellant and Mr. Ping's sister-in-law, contributed £200,000 towards the purchase price and made subsequent mortgage payments.
  • Ms. Ong claimed a 16.67% beneficial interest in the property, asserting her contributions gave rise to a resulting trust.
  • Mr. Ping contended that the contributions were gifts and he was solely entitled to the property, citing the absence of an express declaration of trust.
  • The trial judge rejected Ms. Ong's claim, finding no proof of a common intention to share the beneficial interest and highlighting the lack of supporting documentary evidence.
  • Ms. Ong appealed, arguing that the trial judge had misapplied the legal principles relating to resulting and constructive trusts.

Issues

  1. Whether Ms. Ong's financial contributions constituted a resulting trust that entitled her to a beneficial interest in the property.
  2. Whether the absence of an express declaration of trust prevented Ms. Ong from establishing a beneficial interest through resulting or constructive trust.
  3. What evidentiary standards must be satisfied to rebut the presumption of sole ownership where legal title is in one party’s name.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s decision, finding insufficient evidence to establish a resulting or constructive trust.
  • The court found Ms. Ong's financial contributions alone were insufficient to create a beneficial interest in the absence of clear evidence of a common intention to share ownership.
  • The absence of an express declaration of trust and lack of contemporaneous documentary evidence significantly undermined Ms. Ong’s claim.
  • The court reaffirmed the presumption of sole ownership when the legal title is held by one party, requiring cogent evidence to rebut it.

Legal Principles

  • A declaration of trust over land must generally comply with section 53(1)(b) of the Law of Property Act 1925, requiring written evidence.
  • Resulting trusts may arise from direct contributions to the purchase price, but such contributions must be supported by clear evidence of an intention to create a beneficial interest.
  • Constructive trusts require proof of a common intention, often inferred from conduct, for joint ownership of beneficial interests.
  • Financial contributions, without explicit or implicit evidence of shared ownership intention, are not determinative in claims of beneficial interest.
  • The evidentiary approach in such cases aligns with the principles established in Stack v Dowden [2007] and Jones v Kernott [2011].

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal in Ong v Ping [2017] EWCA Civ 2069 reaffirmed that financial contributions alone do not establish a beneficial interest in property without clear evidence of a shared intention to do so, emphasizing the essential role of formal declarations and documentary evidence in rebutting the presumption of sole ownership.

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