the building plan was obtained in the name of the children. Upon the demise of the husband, his sister/plaintiff claimed the building as the person entitled to inherit it under native law. The defendant adduced evidence to show that her husband was not a man of means, that he was a store keeper of low income and could not have raised money to buy the land or erect the building and that she got much of the money from her parents and brother. Plaintiff sought to rely on section 8 of the Statute of Fraud which requires all trusts over land to be in writing. The court held for the defendant (who defended the case on behalf of the infant children) under the principle of resulting trust. 7. The law encourages conjugal obligation between husband and wife and to that end, the court is reluctant to order that one party leaves the matrimonial home while the marriage subsists. In other words, a wife has a right to remain in the matrimonial home and the courts protect this right even where the man seeks to throw out the woman by subterfuge/cunning. In Old Gate Estate Ltd v. Alexander [1949] 2 All E.R. 882, following a quarrel between husband and his wife, the husband left the matrimonial home, a rented apartment, and gave notice to the landlord that he had surrender the premises. The landlord‟s action to recover from the estranged wife failed. The English Court of Appeal held that as long as the marriage subsisted the husband could not render the wife homeless by subterfuge. His surrender of the premises was ineffectual as long as the wife remained in possession. Similarly, in Brown v. Draper [1944] 1 All E.R. 246, the husband tenant left the matrimonial home after a quarrel, leaving behind some of his furniture. It was held that the husband cannot put an end to the tenancy,