Relationship property proceedings — resulting trust — Property (Relationships) Act 1976, s 2H(2)(b) — Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington LBC [1996] UKHL 12; [1996] 2 All ER 990 — Zhou v Yue [2019] NZHC 2167 — Deng v Zheng [2022] NZSC 76 – Castle v Castle [1997] 2 NZLR 97 (SC, Quilliam J) — Evers v Evers [1985] 2 NZLR 209 (CA) — Thompson v Thompson [2000] NZFLR 161 (HC) — F v F [2017] NZFLR 768. The applicant and first respondent had been married. Initially they lived together in an apartment which had been purchased by the first respondent's parents prior to the parties' relationship. Subsequently they moved into a house purchased by the applicant's father, the second respondent in these proceedings. The house was in the parties' names and the first respondent put forward money towards repayment, but this was repaid by the second respondent. At issue in this case was whether the proceeds of sale of the apartment were relationship property, and whether there was relationship property in the first respondent's registered half share in the house property purchased by the applicant's father. The Judge determined that the applicant and first respondent held the property on a resulting trust for the second respondent. The house was therefore not able to be considered relationship property. In terms of the apartment, the Judge determined that the first respondent owned a half-share of the apartment, and half of the proceeds of sale were therefore relationship property as the couple had lived there. The Judge ordered that the first respondent account to the applicant for a quarter of the sale proceeds. The Judge also ordered that the first respondent account to the applicant for an engagement ring and half of the couple's car. Judgment Date: 16 August 2022.