Fairmont Property Developers UK Ltd v Venus Bridging Ltd & Ors

Fairmont Property Developers UK Ltd v Venus Bridging Ltd & Ors

The court will only exercise its discretion under s.91 Law of Property Act 1925 to give conduct of sale to the mortgagor in exceptional circumstances or where manifest unfairness is demonstrated. In this case, Fairmont failed to establish that the receivers' proposed sale was likely to be at an undervalue or that there was sufficient unfairness to justify overriding Venus's contractual rights. The Judge's refusal to admit expert evidence and her substantive decision were upheld as correct applications of principle and evaluative judgment.

Parties
Claimant / Appellant: Fairmont Property Developers UK Ltd; Defendant / Respondent: Venus Bridging Ltd; Defendant / Respondent: Hinesh Varsani; Defendant / Respondent: Matthew Perrett
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sale of Mortgaged Property, Receivership, Court's Discretion Under S.91 Law of Property Act 1925, Conduct of Sale, Undervalue Sales
Property Law Mortgage Law Sale of Mortgaged Property Receivership Court's Discretion Under S.91 Law of Property Act 1925 Conduct of Sale Undervalue Sales

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fairmont Property Developers UK Ltd

Claimant / Appellant

Venus Bridging Ltd

Defendant / Respondent

Hinesh Varsani

Defendant / Respondent

Matthew Perrett

Defendant / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise its discretion under s.91 Law of Property Act 1925 to give conduct of sale to the mortgagor instead of receivers appointed by the mortgagee
  2. 2 Whether exceptional circumstances or manifest unfairness exist to justify overriding the mortgagee's contractual rights
  3. 3 Whether the proposed sale by receivers is likely to be at an undervalue

Ratio Decidendi

The court will only exercise its discretion under s.91 Law of Property Act 1925 to give conduct of sale to the mortgagor in exceptional circumstances or where manifest unfairness is demonstrated. In this case, Fairmont failed to establish that the receivers' proposed sale was likely to be at an undervalue or that there was sufficient unfairness to justify overriding Venus's contractual rights. The Judge's refusal to admit expert evidence and her substantive decision were upheld as correct applications of principle and evaluative judgment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The injunction restraining the Receivers from selling pending appeal is discharged.