Rudge v Richens: 1873

The mortgagee of land had entered into possession, and sold the property. He sought a declaration that he remained entitled to the balance due on the loan over and above the proceeds of sale. The defendant replied that he was not liable since the mortgagee had deprived him of his chance to repay the loan and recover possession of the property.
Held: The defendant’s plea was bad and dishonest, and the court would not intervene on his behalf. The sale of land by a mortgagee who has taken possession does not discharge the borrower from the covenant to pay any balance remaining due.

Citations:

(1873) LR 8 CP 358

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBristol and West plc v Bartlett and Another; Paragon Finance plc v Banks; Halifax plc v Grant CA 31-Jul-2002
The defendants resisted claims by lenders for the payment of mortgage debts. In each case the lender had exercised the power of sale before issuing proceedings for possession. The defendants queried the limitation period applicable.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.199717