Cases Flashcards
No equitable mortgage by disposition of title deeds alone
Bank of Kuwait v Sahib
No clog or fetter on the equity of redemption
Santley v Wilde
Right to redemption must not be illusionary
Fairclough v Swan
No unconscionable or oppressive bargains against the equity of redemption
Bookbinding v Marden
Mortgagee should obtain no collateral advantages against the equity of redemption
Noakes v Rice
Undue influence is complete defence and set aside a mortgage
Barclays v Obrien
Surety Rules to protect banks against undue influence
RBS v Etridge
Limitation period of 12 years for suing for capital amount
West Bromwich v Wilkinson
Mortgagee’s inherent right to possession, before the ink is dry
Four maids v Dudley Marsh
S36 AJA Paying arrears, pay any sums due was ‘the entire sum, if the mortgage stipulated such’
Halifax v Clarke
AJA, pay off arrears, Within a reasonable period can be the whole term of the mortgage
Cheltenham & Gloucester v Norgan
AJA, pay off arrears, likely to be able definition as a realistic prospect of repayment and evidence
First national bank v Syed
AJA, self-sale, reasonable period max 6-12 months
National & Provincial v Lloyds
AJA, self-sale, Likely to be able as a real prospect and some evidence of sale occurring
Target Homes v Clothier
Court’s inherent right to postpone, limited only where AJA fails, but unlikely
Birmingham v Count
Sale without first obtaining court order, permitted, but frowned upon can cause difficulty
Ropaigealach v Barclays
Horsham v Clark & Beech.
Mortgagee’s conduct on sale: Mortgagee is not a trustee of the power of sale for the mortgagor, nor are their actions tortious but must act in good faith
Silven v RBS
Mortgagee’s conduct on sale: can sell when they like, no duty to wait for best price
Cuckmere brick v Mutual finance
Mortgagee’s conduct on sale: cannot sell to themselves or an associate. Can be set aside
Corbett v Halifax
Mortgagee’s conduct on sale: motivation must be to realise security
Meretz v ACP
Power to direct a sale after repossession has occurred by the mortgagor as per s91(1) LPA
Palk v Mortgage services
Actual occupation: ‘physical presence’
Hodgson v Marks
Actual occupation to be given its ordinary meaning
Thompson v Foy
Actual occupation: Manifest intention to return
Hogget v Hoggett
Overreaching
Midland bank v Green
Actual Occupation: overrides an interest unless overreached, had proper enquiries been done.
Williams & Glynn’s v Boland
Leases; Certainty of term
Lace v Chantler
Mexfield v Berrisford
Leases: Exclusive Possession - No tenancy unless the occupier enjoys exclusive possesion
Street v Mountford
Leases: ‘At a rent’
Street v Mountford
Licence: Licence makes an action lawful, which without it had been unlawful’
Thomas v Sorrell
Bare licence, revolution permitting reasonable time
Robson v Hallett
Contractual Licence revocable at will of licensor
Wood v Leadbitter
Contractual licence: revocation can cause an action in contract
Hurst v picture theatres
Exclusive Possession: joint occupancy with shared space is licence only
Appah v Parncliffe
Exclusive Possession: landlord having a key is not a determinative factor to fail the test of exclusive possesion
Aslan v Murphy
Exclusive Possession: Lack of intention to create legal relations, exclusive possession alone will not be enough
Facchini v Bryson
Exclusive Possession: no longer relation: family arrangements
Cobb v Lane
Exclusive possession: Lack of intention to create legal relation: act of generiosity
Marcroft v Smith
Exclusive Occupation: Service occupancy to allow the better performance of their duties
Norris v Checksfield
Exclusive Possession; service occupancy; sold separately to their employment - not to better perform their duties
Facchini v Bryson
