Husband and wife were the joint owners of a house subject to a mortgage. The husband purported to remortgage the house, the wife’s signature being forged.
Held: Although the remortgage only took effect as a charge on the husband’s equitable interest, the new mortgagee was subrogated to the rights of the original mortgagee even though the wife knew nothing about the remortgaging.
Judges:
Hoffmann J
Citations:
Unreported, 3rd February 1987
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Bankers Trust Company v Namdar and Namdar CA 14-Feb-1997
The bank sought repayment of its loan and possession of the defendants’ property. The second defendant said that the charge had only her forged signature.
Held: Non-compliance with section 2 of the 1989 Act does not make a bargain illegal, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Land
Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.416036
