It is generally not appropriate to order possession against one of two mortgagors where the order would be of no benefit to the mortgagee, particularly where the joint mortgagors were husband and wife. An ordinary order for possession might be pointless if immediately it was complied with it, the joint mortgagor, who was allowed to remain in possession, simply granted the other joint mortgagor a licence to retake possession.
Although the Convention was not yet part of UK law, Schiemann felt able to use it as a clue to the problems faced here.
Schiemann LJ
[1997] 2 All ER 609
European Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – The Co-Operative Bank Plc v Phillips ChD 21-Aug-2014
coop_phillipsChD1408
The bank had brought possession proceedings against the defendant under two legal charges securing personal guarantees. The proceedings had been abandoned, but the court now was asked whether costs for the defendant should be on the standard or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land, Human Rights
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.536056