Judge basically says there is no sanction for a fraudulent asset protection scheme (and a fraudulent detrimental reliance is still good enough for a constructive trust per para 62), so fraud does pay (in some cases) after all.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2021/1954.html
I'm not sure why the "clean hands" doctrine was not deployed, as in this similar fraudulent asset protection BO case that went the other way: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2021/597.html