Property – Resulting trust. A judge had not erred in holding, among other things, that the respondent held a 100% beneficial interest in a residential property in Luton (the property), the legal title to which was held by the appellant. The respondent had successfully contended before the judge that it had been agreed between the parties that the appellant would secure the mortgage to purchase the property on the respondent's behalf, and that the latter would pay the deposit and meet the monthly mortgage payments. The respondent had made payments towards the mortgage and he had resided in the property with his family since its purchase. The Queen's Bench Division, in dismissing the appellant's appeal, held that there was no basis on which the judge's primary findings of fact could be disturbed, and that he had clearly found that there was a resulting trust, notwithstanding he had not used that term, and that the agreement was that the entire beneficial interest was to be respondent's. The court further held that the appellant's agreement to incur the liability of the mortgage was not sufficient, in itself, to confer on him any beneficial interest in the property.