The Mortgage Business Plc v Green [2013] EWHC 4243 (Ch) (27 June 2013)

The Mortgage Business Plc v Green [2013] EWHC 4243 (Ch) (27 June 2013)

The Bank was not put on inquiry as to undue influence because the mortgage and further advance were joint advances, and there was no evidence that the Bank was aware that Mrs Green was acting as surety for her son's debts. No actual, imputed, or constructive notice of undue influence was established. Therefore, the Bank's rights under the mortgage are not affected by any undue influence, and it is entitled to possession and/or subrogation.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 4243 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: The Mortgage Business PLC; First Defendant: Lars Green; Second Defendant: Lone Green
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Mortgage Possession and Undue Influence Claim / High Court Judgment, Transfer to County Court for Possession Order
Outcome
Claim allowed; counterclaim dismissed; case transferred to county court for possession order.
Legal Topics
Undue Influence, Mortgage Possession, Constructive Notice, Imputed Notice, Subrogation, Remedies
Property Law Equity and Trusts Civil Procedure Undue Influence Mortgage Possession Constructive Notice Imputed Notice Subrogation +1 more

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 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Mortgage Business PLC

Claimant

Lars Green

First Defendant

Lone Green

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Mortgage Possession and Undue Influence Claim / High Court Judgment, Transfer to County Court for Possession Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mrs Green's obligations under the 2008 mortgage and further advance were procured by undue influence of her son Lars Green
  2. 2 Whether the Bank's rights under the mortgage are affected by any undue influence
  3. 3 Whether the Bank had actual, imputed, or constructive notice of undue influence

Ratio Decidendi

The Bank was not put on inquiry as to undue influence because the mortgage and further advance were joint advances, and there was no evidence that the Bank was aware that Mrs Green was acting as surety for her son's debts. No actual, imputed, or constructive notice of undue influence was established. Therefore, the Bank's rights under the mortgage are not affected by any undue influence, and it is entitled to possession and/or subrogation.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; counterclaim dismissed; case transferred to county court for possession order.

Orders

  • Counterclaim dismissed
  • Claim transferred to county court (suggested Bristol) for possession order