Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland Nv v Burch: CA 20 Jun 1996

The defendant had charged her property to secure her employer’s debt. When the bank sought repossession, she said that the charge had been affected by the undue influence and that the terms of the charge were so harsh and inconscionable that a court should not enforce it.
Nousre, Millett, Swinton Thomas LJJ
[1996] EWCA Civ 1292, [1997] 1 All ER 144, [1997] 2 FCR 1, [1997] 74 P and CR 384, [1997] 29 HLR 513, [1997] Fam Law 168, [1997] 1 FLR 11
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
ApprovedMultiservice Bookbinding Ltd v Marden ChD 1978
To have a transaction set aside as a harsh and unconscionable bargain, a party would have to show not only that the terms of the transaction were harsh or oppressive, but also moral unfairness. Browne-Wilkinson J said: ‘In my judgment a bargain . .

Cited by:
CitedJones v Morgan CA 28-Jun-2001
The claimant appealed against an order refusing him enforcement an agreement for the purchase of a one half share in a property. The judge had found the agreement to be unconscionable.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The judge had wrongly . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 April 2021; Ref: scu.245309

Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland NV v Burch: CA 1 Jul 1996

A Bank was to assume that undue influence existed where they knew that an employee was giving security for his employer’s debt to the bank. An unlimited guarantee given by an employee to his employer’s bank was set aside as unconscionable. The circumstances in which the doctrine of unconscionable bargains would apply were similar to those of undue influence. ‘Equity’s jurisdiction to relieve against (unconscionable bargains), although more rarely exercised in modern times is at least as venerable as its jurisdiction to relieve against those procured by undue influence.’ When attending his client to witness such a document, the solicitor must in any event advise her that she is under no obligation to enter into the transaction at all and, if she still wishes to do so, that she is not bound to accept the terms of any document which has been put before her.
Nourse LJ
Gazette 04-Sep-1996, Times 01-Jul-1996, [1997] 1 All ER 144
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedChagos Islanders v The Attorney General, Her Majesty’s British Indian Ocean Territory Commissioner QBD 9-Oct-2003
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
CitedPortman Building Society v Dusangh and Others CA 19-Apr-2000
The defendant sought to set aside an order for possession under a mortgage.
Held: Where a case was strong enough on its face in terms of conduct and terms, unconscionable conduct could be inferred if there was no explanation offered to . .
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 April 2021; Ref: scu.79606

Cheese v Thomas: CA 24 Aug 1993

A transaction entered into was manifestly disadvantageous to him. After a finding of undue influence, losses on the sale of a property are to be shared by both parties, so as to restore the parties to their original positions as near as might be.
Lord Nicholls Vice Chancellor
Independent 30-Aug-1993, Times 24-Aug-1993, [1994] 1 WLR 129
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedVale v Armstrong, Armstrong ChD 21-May-2004
The claimant sought to set aside a transfer of his house to the defendants made at an undervalue and under an enduring power of attorney, who had charged it to raise money for their business. He had received independent advice.
Held: The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.79002

Anthony Papouis v Valerie Gibson-West: ChD 4 Mar 2004

The deceased had purchased her flat using the discount available as a tenant, and money contributed by the defendant. A deed of trust had been executed, which the claimant now asserted had been obtained by undue influence.
Held: The principles underlying undue influence had been established in Etridge. The relationship between the parties was warm and friendly, and in the making of the deed of trust the relationship between Miss Bennett and Mrs Gibson-West was not such as to raise any evidential presumption of undue influence. The court set out a summary of the law of undue influence.
The Honourable Mr Justice Lewison
[2004] EWHC 396 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .

Cited by:
CitedBowser v Caley and others ChD 16-Mar-2006
The claimant alleged that the transfer by him of his land to his sister and her husband had been obtained by any of several wrongful means and should be set aside.
Held: The allegations of undue influence failed. The claimant did not establish . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 March 2021; Ref: scu.194116

The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Chandra and Another: ChD 28 Jan 2010

The bank sought to enforce guarantees supported by a charge on the defendants home. They said that the bank had by its actions in supporting further development of a project, released them from obligations to it.
Held: David Richards J analysed the difference between inadvertent failure to disclose and a deliberate suppression of information, in the context of a confidential husband and wife relationship: ‘Mis-stating the position or misleading the wife is different from an inadvertent failure to disclose, a distinction familiar in the law of misrepresentation. Of course a statement which, though strictly true, is misleading without qualification will fall within these observations of Lord Nicholls. Likewise, a deliberate suppression of information because the husband knows that, if disclosed, it will deter the wife from giving the guarantee will involve an abuse by him of her confidence. It would be unconscionable and rightly categorised as unacceptable means.’
Richards J
[2010] 1 Lloyds Rep 677, [2010] EWHC 105 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedHewett v First Plus Financial Group Plc CA 24-Mar-2010
The appellant appealed against a mortgage possession order, saying that she had been misled into signing the charge by a non-disclosure by her husband of an extra-marital affair he was conducting. The bank had not met the standards set in Etridge, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 March 2021; Ref: scu.396379

Bowser v Caley and others: ChD 16 Mar 2006

The claimant alleged that the transfer by him of his land to his sister and her husband had been obtained by any of several wrongful means and should be set aside.
Held: The allegations of undue influence failed. The claimant did not establish that the sister had sufficient influence over him, and nor had he established the plea of non est factum or mistake. As to the trust alleged: ‘for a constructive trust to arise it must be established that there was a common intention or understanding that the claimant was to have some beneficial interest in the property. If the claimant has acted to his detriment in reliance on this intention or understanding a constructive trust or proprietary estoppel arises. There is little difference between a constructive trust or a proprietary estoppel though it has been said that there is a greater flexibility in the remedy in the case of an estoppel. ‘ Such a trust arose in the nature of a life interest in the proceeds of sale. However the costs of the actin would be likely to deplete any fund available.
[2006] EWHC B3 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
CitedAnthony Papouis v Valerie Gibson-West ChD 4-Mar-2004
The deceased had purchased her flat using the discount available as a tenant, and money contributed by the defendant. A deed of trust had been executed, which the claimant now asserted had been obtained by undue influence.
Held: The principles . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 March 2021; Ref: scu.241303

UCB Corporate Services Limited v Williams: CA 2 May 2002

The wife of a borrower sought to defend a claim for possession of the property by the chargor. She claimed that he signature had been obtained by an equitable fraud.
Held: Undue influence occurred when improper means of persuasion were used to procure the complainant’s consent such that the consent ought not fairly to be treated as the expression of the complainant’s free will. Equity proceeded on the basis that there was no consent. Such would be enough to set aside the transaction as against the wrongdoer, and the lender was fixed with notice of that right. There was no need for the wife to establish that but for the trick, she would not have signed.
Lord Justice Peter Gibson
Times 27-May-2002, Gazette 13-Jun-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 555
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedCIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to . .
CitedDowns v Chappell; Downs v Stephenson Smart (a Firm) CA 1996
The plaintiff purchased a book shop. He claimed that in doing so he had relied upon the accounts prepared and signed off by the respective defendants.
Held: The judge had been wrong by testing what would have been the true figures as against . .

Cited by:
CitedYorkshire Bank Plc v Tinsley CA 25-Jun-2004
The defendant’s husband had charged the matrimonial home on several occasions to the claimant. It was found that the first charges were affected by undue influence and could not be enforced. The defendant argued that the last charge which replaced . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 March 2021; Ref: scu.170225

Bank of Scotland v Hussain and Another: ChD 5 Nov 2010

The second defendant had, under the undue influence of the first defendant sold him her house at an undervalue. She also asserted non est factum. He then charged it to the claimant. The court was asked which innocent party should prevail. She said she had been in actual occupation at the time of the charge. The bank said that the defendant was estopped from raising now issues which could have been brought in the earlier proceedings.
Newey J
[2010] EWHC 2812 (Ch)
Bailii
Land Registration Act 1925 70(1)(g)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedHenderson v Henderson 20-Jul-1843
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation
The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings.
Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule . .
CitedThoday v Thoday CA 1964
The court discussed the difference between issue estoppel, and action estoppel: ‘The particular type of estoppel relied upon by the husband is estoppel per rem judicatam. This is a generic term which in modern law includes two species. The first . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 March 2021; Ref: scu.425781

Smith v Cooper and Another: CA 25 Jun 2010

The Court set out the test for where to set aside a transaction after a finding of undue influence: ‘[where] the presumption of undue influence applies, that is to say, the court will presume that the transaction was procured by undue influence exercised by one party over the other, in other words by the abuse by the one of the position of influence that he has over the other. In such a case it is then up to the one party to prove that the transaction was not procured by an abuse of his position of influence but was rather the free exercise of the will of the other party as a result of full, free and informed thought.’
Jacob, Lloyd, Wilson L
[2010] EWCA Civ 722, [2010] 2 FCR 551, [2010] 2 FLR 1521
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBrown v Stephenson ChD 23-Aug-2013
The claimant sought to have set aside transfers and declarations of trust made by her in the defendant’s favour, saying that they had been given under his undue influence taking advantage of her dyslexia, and by bullying.
Held: The claims of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 February 2021; Ref: scu.418436

Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Aboody: CA 1989

In a case where the defendant said that a mortgage had been signed from undue pressure the court may find actual undue influence as opposed to presumed undue influence. Slade LJ said: ‘Ever since the judgments of this court in Allcard v Skinner a clear distinction has been drawn between (1) those cases in which the court will uphold a plea of undue influence only if it is satisfied that such influence has been affirmatively proved on the evidence (commonly referred to as cases of ‘actual undue influence’); (2) those cases (commonly referred to as cases of ‘presumed undue influence) in which the relationship between the parties will lead the court to presume that undue influence has been exerted unless evidence is adduced proving the contrary, eg by showing that the complaining party has had independent advice.’ He defined actual undue influence as: ‘Leaving aside proof of manifest disadvantage, we think that a person relying on a plea of actual undue influence must show: (a) that the other party to the transaction (or someone who induced the transaction for his own benefit) had the capacity to influence the complainant; (b) that the influence was exercised; (c) that its exercise was undue; (d) that its exercise brought about the transaction’
Slade LJ
[1992] 4 All ER 955, [1989] 2 WLR 759, [1990] 1 QB 923
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedAllcard v Skinner CA 1887
allcard_skinnerCA1887
The donor had parted with almost all her property. She now sought to have the transaction set aside for undue influence.
Held: Where a wife has entered into a gratuitous transaction with her husband, the burden was on the husband as donee to . .

Cited by:
CitedDunbar Bank Plc v Maurice Nadeem Zubaida Nadeem and Another CA 1-Jul-1998
Manifest disadvantage had to be shown in order to establish a claim of presumed undue influence, but only damage if actual undue influence shown. Equity can only help if restitutio in integrum could be achieved. . .
CitedGovernor and Company of Bank of Scotland v Bennett and Another CA 21-Dec-1998
The bank appealed an order setting aside a deed of guarantee and mortgage and denying the possession order sought. The guarantee had been given to support borrowings of the defendant’s company. The defendant was the wife of the director and had been . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
DisapprovedCIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to . .
CitedBrown v Stephenson ChD 23-Aug-2013
The claimant sought to have set aside transfers and declarations of trust made by her in the defendant’s favour, saying that they had been given under his undue influence taking advantage of her dyslexia, and by bullying.
Held: The claims of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 February 2021; Ref: scu.180570

Thompson v Foy: ChD 20 May 2009

Lewison J discussed the decision in Etridge: ‘In the light of the arguments before me, there are some additional observations I should make. First, although in Etridge Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead described the paradigm case of a relationship where influence is presumed as being one in which the complainant reposed trust and confidence in the other party in relation to the management of the complainant’s financial affairs, I do not consider that this description was intended to be exhaustive. To restrict the type of trust and confidence in this way would not be consistent with the authoritative exposition by Lindley LJ in Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145 in which Lindley LJ referred to ‘cases in which the position of the donor to the donee has been such that it has been the duty of the donee to advise the donor, or even to manage his property for him’. This very sentence was paraphrased by Lord Nicholls. In addition, when describing the circumstances in which the burden of proof would shift Lord Nicholls used much more general language . . Second, the requisite trust and confidence can arise in the course of the impugned transaction itself: Turkey v Awadh [2005] 2 P and CR 29.’
Lewison J
[2009] EWHC 1076 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedAllcard v Skinner CA 1887
allcard_skinnerCA1887
The donor had parted with almost all her property. She now sought to have the transaction set aside for undue influence.
Held: Where a wife has entered into a gratuitous transaction with her husband, the burden was on the husband as donee to . .
CitedTurkey v Awadh and Another CA 8-Mar-2005
. .

Cited by:
CitedHewett v First Plus Financial Group Plc CA 24-Mar-2010
The appellant appealed against a mortgage possession order, saying that she had been misled into signing the charge by a non-disclosure by her husband of an extra-marital affair he was conducting. The bank had not met the standards set in Etridge, . .
AppliedLink Lending Ltd v Bustard CA 23-Apr-2010
The respondent had been detained in a secure mental unit for a year. In that time her home was charged to the appellant. She asserted that she had been a person in actual occupation. The chargee now appealed against a finding that the respondent had . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 February 2021; Ref: scu.346246

Jorden, And Louisa, His Wife v Money: HL 30 Jul 1854

Where a permn possesses a legal right, a Court of Equity will not interfere to restrain him from enforcing it, though, between the time of its creation and that of his attempt to enforce it, he has made representations of his intention to abandon it. Nor will Equity interfere even though the parties to whom these representations were made, have acted on them, and have, in full belief in them, entered into irrevocable engagements. To raise an equity in such a case, there must be a misrepresentation of existing facts, and not of mere intention (Lord St. Leonards dissentiente).
Per Lord St. Leonards, ‘ It is immaterial whether there is a misrepresentation of a fact as it actually existed, or a misrepresentation of an intention to do or abstain from doing an act which would lead tom the damage of the party whom you thereby induced to deal in marriage, or in purchase, or in anything of that sort, on the faith of that representation.’
[1854] UKHL J50, [1854] 10 ER 868, (1854) HL 185, (1854) 5 HL Cas 185, [1854] EngR 787, (1854) 5 HLC 185, (1854) 10 ER 868, [1854] UKPC 22
Bailii, Commonlii, Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 13 February 2021; Ref: scu.293644

Birmingham City Council v Forde: QBD 13 Jan 2009

Christopher Clarke J upheld the validity of a retrospective CFA entered into between solicitor and client on the eve of a settlement, in the knowledge that the existing arrangement might be vulnerable to challenge. The paying party alleged undue influence.
Held: The challenge was rejected. The client had been ‘prepared to assist her solicitors recover their fees despite the challenge to the validity of CFA 1’, and that it would be ‘entirely understandable for her not to seek to rely on the unattractive contention that [the solicitors] should get nothing at all for what they had done . . ‘
Christopher Clarke J
[2009] EWHC 12 (QB), [2009] 1 WLR 2732, [2010] 1 All ER 802, [2009] 2 Costs LR 206, [2009] NPC 7
Bailii
Citing:
Appeal fromForde v Birmingham City Council SCCO 30-Apr-2008
. .

Cited by:
CitedRadford and Another v Frade and Others QBD 8-Jul-2016
The court was asked as to the terms on which solicitors and Counsel were retained to act for the defendants. The appeals did not raise any issues concerning costs practice, and were by way of review of the Costs Judge’s rulings, and not by way of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 February 2021; Ref: scu.279942

Honeyman’s Executors v Sharp: scs 14 Mar 1978

The action concludes for declarator that a purported gift by the deceased to the defender of four valuable paintings by the French artist Boudin falls to be reduced and for certain consequential relief. Though the word ‘undue’ is not used in the pursuers’ pleas-in-law, the action is in substance laid on the principle usually described as ‘undue influence.’
Lord Maxwell
1978 SC 223, [1978] ScotCS CSOH – 4, 1979 SLT 177
Bailii

Updated: 12 February 2021; Ref: scu.279506

NA v MA: FD 24 Nov 2006

The very wealthy H found that W had committed adultery with one of his friends. H pressured W to sign an agreement providing that she would receive a specified lump sum and annual payments if their marriage ended in divorce. W signed it because H insisted that she should do so if the marriage was to continue.
Held: Baron J said that: ‘as the idea of an agreement evolved it hardened into a legal, post-nuptial agreement’. It was on this basis that H sought to have the agreement converted into an order of the court. When dealing with the law Baron J did not distinguish clearly between ante-nuptial, post-nuptial and separation agreements. She said: ‘It is an accepted fact that an agreement entered into between husband and wife does not oust the jurisdiction of this court. For many years, agreements between spouses were considered void for public policy reasons but this is no longer the case. In fact, over the years, pre-nuptial ‘contracts’ have become increasingly common place and are, I accept, much more likely to be accepted by these courts as governing what should occur between the parties when the prospective marriage comes to an end. That is, of course, subject to the discretion of the court and the application of a test of fairness/manifest unfairness. It may well be that Parliament will provide legislation but, until that occurs, current authority makes it clear that the agreements are not enforceable per se, although they can be persuasive (or definitive) depending upon the precise circumstances that lead to their completion.’
The judge went on to apply the law of undue influence, holding: ‘I am clear that, to overturn the agreement, I have to be satisfied that this wife’s will was overborne by her husband exercising undue pressure or influence over her. I am also clear that if I do not overturn the agreement per se, I still have to consider whether it is fair and should be approved so as to become a court order.’
She overturned the agreement on the ground of undue influence.
Baron J DBE
[2006] EWHC 2900 (Fam), [2007] 1 FLR 1760, [2007] Fam Law 295
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRadmacher v Granatino CA 2-Jul-2009
Husband and wife, neither English, had married in England. Beforehand they had signed a prenuptial agreement in Germany agreeing that neither should claim against the other on divorce. The wife appealed against an order to pay a lump sum to the . .
CitedRadmacher (Formerly Granatino) v Granatino SC 20-Oct-2010
The parties, from Germany and France married and lived at first in England. They had signed a pre-nuptial agreement in Germany which would have been valid in either country of origin. H now appealed against a judgment which bound him to it, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 February 2021; Ref: scu.279027

Bank of Montreal v Stuart: PC 1911

The court used the phrase ‘immoderate and irrational’ to describe the character of a transaction which might of its nature suggest undue influence. A solicitor who is advising a client about a transaction and has reason to suspect that the client is the victim of undue influence is placed under a duty to the client to try and protect her.
The relationship of husband and wife did not as a matter of law raise a presumption of undue influence.
Lord Macnaghten
[1911] AC 120
Canada
Cited by:
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
CitedBrown v Stephenson ChD 23-Aug-2013
The claimant sought to have set aside transfers and declarations of trust made by her in the defendant’s favour, saying that they had been given under his undue influence taking advantage of her dyslexia, and by bullying.
Held: The claims of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 February 2021; Ref: scu.180571

The Centre for Reproductive Medicine v U: FD 24 Jan 2002

The defendant sought to use the sperm of her deceased husband for her insemination. The deceased had apparently withdrawn his consent to the use of his sperm posthumously. His widow claimed that he had been influenced to change the form, by an implied threat that the treatment would not continue.
Held: the case of re T established that for undue influence it must be shown that the patients will was overborne. That was not the case here.
The President
[2002] EWHC 36 (Fam)
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte DB CA 6-Feb-1997
At the applicant’s request samples of sperm were taken from her husband hours prior to his death, when he was in a coma.
Held: Sperm cannot lawfully be taken from a comatose man in order later to allow his surviving wife to be artificially . .
CitedIn re T (Adult: Refusal of Treatment) CA 1992
A patient’s right to veto medical treatment is absolute: ‘This right of choice is not limited to decisions which others might regard as sensible. It exists notwithstanding that the reasons for making the choice are rational, irrational, unknown or . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromMrs U v Centre for Reproductive Medicine CA 2002
The 1990 Act lays great emphasis upon consent. Scientific techniques developed since the first IVF baby open up the possibility of creating human life in quite new ways bringing huge practical and ethical difficulties. These have to be balanced . .
Appeal fromU v Centre for Reproductive Medicine CA 24-Apr-2002
The claimant appealed a refusal to grant an order preventing the destruction of the sperm of her late husband held by the respondent fertility clinic. The clinic had persuaded her husband to sign a form of consent for this purpose. The claimant said . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 February 2021; Ref: scu.167528

Forsdike v Forsdike: CA 21 Feb 1997

The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim to set aside a transfer by way of gift by his father on the basis of an alleged undue influence.
Held: The judges was entitled to make the findings he had done, and to be impressed by the spacing of the transactions. The appeal failed.
[1997] EWCA Civ 1066
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedWatt (or Thomas) v Thomas HL 1947
When Scots Appellate Court may set decision aside
The House considered when it was appropriate for an appellate court in Scotland to set aside the judgment at first instance.
Lord Thankerton said: ‘(1) Where a question of fact has been tried by a judge without a jury, and there is no question . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
CitedLangton v Langton and Another ChD 24-Feb-1995
The doctrine of ‘unconscionable bargain’ does not extend to gifts obtained by undue influence. . .
CitedAvon Finance Co Ltd v Bridger CA 1985
The son arranged finance for his parents to move near to him. He borrowed money to help finance it, secured by an expensive second loan. He deceived his parents into executing the loan. After the son defaulted, the plaintiff sought possession.
Updated: 09 February 2021; Ref: scu.141462

U v Centre for Reproductive Medicine: CA 24 Apr 2002

The claimant appealed a refusal to grant an order preventing the destruction of the sperm of her late husband held by the respondent fertility clinic. The clinic had persuaded her husband to sign a form of consent for this purpose. The claimant said that the form had been obtained by undue influence, believing that the treatment would not be provided unless it was signed. He had first completed the form to refuse such consent, but the staff had persuaded him to change it.
Held: A withdrawal of consent might be vitiated by undue influence. It was for the claimant to establish undue influence. However here, the issue is not strictly one of undue influence, but rather of a consent given within a particular statutory context. The court stressed the great importance to be attached to the prescribed form completed in compliance with Schedule 3 of the Act. The judge’s decision was essentially one of fact having heard and seen the witnesses. That decision was not to be disturbed.
Lady Justice Hale
[2002] EWCA Civ 565
Bailii
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedIn re T (Adult: Refusal of Treatment) CA 1992
A patient’s right to veto medical treatment is absolute: ‘This right of choice is not limited to decisions which others might regard as sensible. It exists notwithstanding that the reasons for making the choice are rational, irrational, unknown or . .
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
Appeal fromThe Centre for Reproductive Medicine v U FD 24-Jan-2002
The defendant sought to use the sperm of her deceased husband for her insemination. The deceased had apparently withdrawn his consent to the use of his sperm posthumously. His widow claimed that he had been influenced to change the form, by an . .

Cited by:
CitedEvans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and others CA 25-Jun-2004
The applicant challenged the decision of the court that the sperm donor who had fertilised her eggs to create embryos stored by the respondent IVF clinic, could withdraw his consent to their continued storage or use.
Held: The judge worked . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 January 2021; Ref: scu.170240

Padgham and another v Rochelle and another: ChD 1 Aug 2002

The testator occupied farmland and buildings. He was helped in maintaining the farm by his son, but gave the land to his grandchildren by his will. The son claimed to have been granted an informal written agricultural tenancy by his father before his death.
Held: The arrangement was not intended to create legal relations, and no tenancy was created. The agreement was sufficient to satisfy section 52, but in construing it, the court had to allow for the fact that the deceased had placed particular trust and confidence in the son, and a presumption of undue influence arose. The claimant had not displaced that presumption, and the tenancy agreement was set aside.
Mr Launcelot Henderson QC, sitting as a deputy judge of the division
Gazette 03-Oct-2002
Law of Property Act 1925 52
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedWalsh v Lonsdale CA 1882
Lonsdale purported to grant to Walsh a seven year lease with rent payable in advance. The lease was not embodied in a deed, and when Walsh went into possession, an annual tenancy with rent payable in arrear was created. Walsh did not pay in advance, . .
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 January 2021; Ref: scu.177316

Greene King Plc v Stanley and others: CA 30 Nov 2001

The claimant challenged an order that the two defendant chargors were discharged from liability to the claimants under their individual voluntary arrangement and on the basis that it had been entered under undue influence.
[2001] EWCA Civ 1966, [2002] BPIR 491
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 January 2021; Ref: scu.218520

National Westminster Bank plc v Morgan: HL 7 Mar 1985

Undue influence was alleged.
Held: Equity avoids dispositions of property procured by the improper or unconscientious use of the influence of one person over another, that cannot be explained on the grounds of friendship, charity or other ordinary motives on which people ordinarily act. It was not enough simply to show a relationship of dominance or influence, but also the parties needed to establish that the transaction constituted a manifest and unfair disadvantage to the person seeking.
The relationship of borrower and lender, or banker and customer, does not give rise, of itself, to any presumption of special disability on the part of the borrower or of undue influence, but exceptionally it may do. If the relationship of banker and customer becomes one in which the banker acquires a dominating influence, and a manifestly disadvantageous transaction is proved, ‘there would then be room’ for a court to presume that it resulted from the exercise of undue influence. ‘The Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that the presumption of undue influence can arise from the evidence of the relationship of the parties without also evidence that the transaction itself was wrongful in that it constituted an advantage taken of the person subjected to the influence which, failing proof to the contrary, was explicable only on the basis that undue influence had been exercised to procure it.’
Lord Scarman said that the determination of whether a relationship of undue influence exists is to be arrived by ‘a meticulous examination of the facts.’ and ‘the Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that the presumption of undue influence can arise from the evidence of the relationship of the parties without also evidence that the transaction itself was wrongful in that it constituted an advantage taken of the person subjected to the influence which, failing proof to the contrary, was explicable only on the basis that undue influence had been exercised to procure it.’ He continued with reference to Poosathurai: ‘The wrongfulness of the transaction must, therefore be shown: it must be one in which an unfair advantage has been taken of another . . the doctrine is not limited to transactions of gift. A commercial relationship can become a relationship in which one party assumes a role of dominating influence over the other.’
Lord Scarman, Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Roskill, Lord Bridge of Harwich, Lord Brandon of Oakbrook
[1985] AC 686, [1985] UKHL 2, [1985] 1 All ER 821, [1985] ANZ Conv R 251, [1985] 2 WLR 588
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedPoosathurai v Kannappa Chettiar and Others PC 18-Nov-1919
(Madras) . .

Cited by:
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
CitedCIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 January 2021; Ref: scu.219906

Yorkshire Bank Plc v Tinsley: CA 25 Jun 2004

The defendant’s husband had charged the matrimonial home on several occasions to the claimant. It was found that the first charges were affected by undue influence and could not be enforced. The defendant argued that the last charge which replaced the earlier ones inherited that defect.
Held: The last mortgage was inseparably connected with the earlier mortgages and there was nothing to render the past abuse, which amounted to undue influence, and of which the Bank had constructive notice, inoperative in connection with the last mortgage. As a result, the mere fact that there was no new and additional inequity in relation to the 1994 mortgage was not determinative, for the inequity of the earlier transactions had not been cured.
Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Longmore
[2004] EWCA Civ 816, Times 12-Aug-2004, [2004] 3 All ER 463, [2004] 1 WLR 2380
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedAlec Lobb (Garages) Ltd v Total Oil Ltd CA 1985
The court was asked whether the terms of a lease and lease back amounted to an unconscionable bargain and was unenforceable.
Held: The court affirmed the decision at first instance, but emphasised the need for unconscientious behaviour rather . .
CitedCrowe v Ballard 1790
Crowe was the expectant heir to a legacy with a life tenant and in 1777 asked Ballard to sell his expectancy on his behalf. Ballard claimed to have sold to Toft for andpound;350, but had in fact bought the expectancy himself and advanced . .
CitedUCB Corporate Services Limited v Williams CA 2-May-2002
The wife of a borrower sought to defend a claim for possession of the property by the chargor. She claimed that he signature had been obtained by an equitable fraud.
Held: Undue influence occurred when improper means of persuasion were used to . .
CitedKempson v Ashbee CA 1874
Ashbee lent money to Sladden (the stepfather) in 1857 taking a promissory note from Miss Kempson, the stepdaughter, to repay andpound;450 with interest. Miss Kempson was 20 at the time and living with Sladden and her mother; she had initially . .
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 January 2021; Ref: scu.198408

Coldunell Ltd v Gallon: CA 1986

Even in the absence of agency, if the debtor has been guilty of undue influence or misrepresentation in securing the giving of security by a third party to cover his debt to the creditor, the creditor may not be able to enforce the surety contract if the creditor had notice, actual or constructive, of the debtor’s conduct.
[1986] 1 All ER 429, CA, [1986] 2 WLR 466, [1986] QB 1184
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
Updated: 13 January 2021; Ref: scu.180574

Vale v Armstrong, Armstrong: ChD 21 May 2004

The claimant sought to set aside a transfer of his house to the defendants made at an undervalue and under an enduring power of attorney, who had charged it to raise money for their business. He had received independent advice.
Held: The transaction was disadvantageous to the claimant and there was therefore a presumption of undue influence. However there was also evidence of independent advice etc to rebut that presumption, but ‘it by no means follows that prior legal advice rebuts the presumption.’
The independent advice had failed to bring home the true disadvantages of the transaction to the claimant. The defendant failed to rebut the presumption, and it was set aside.
Mr. Justice Evans-Lombe
[2004] EWHC 1160 (Ch)
Bailii
Citing:
CitedCIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to . .
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
CitedCheese v Thomas CA 24-Aug-1993
A transaction entered into was manifestly disadvantageous to him. After a finding of undue influence, losses on the sale of a property are to be shared by both parties, so as to restore the parties to their original positions as near as might be. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 January 2021; Ref: scu.197075

Jennings and Another v Cairns: CA 18 Nov 2003

Nieces had fallen out over their aunt’s estate. One niece had been closer than the others, and despite not properly understanding what she was doing the deceased had made lifetime gifts to the niece who was now executor. She appealed a finding of having an obligation as executor to reinstate the estate despite not herself having misled the aunt.
Held: The court had to undertake a balanced assessment of all the relevant circumstances in deciding whether undue influence had been established and whether it had been rebutted by the niece. The niece might have discharged that burden by showing that her aunt had made an informed choice, but the niece had not done this. Mistake was not a complete answer merely because advice independent of the niece had been given to Enid.
Parties should recognise that it is the practice of the Court of Appeal judges to pre-read case, and therefore, agreed lists of authorities must be supplied as required 28 days before the hearing and in any event no less than eight days before. The court recognised the difficulties of acceding to the 28 day requirement, but the eight day period must be complied with. Parties had not properly complied with the 2001 direction on citation of authorities. That direction must be followed.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR
Times 25-Nov-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 1935
Bailii
Civil Procedure Rules 15.11
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedPractice Direction on the Citation of Authorities LCJ 9-Apr-2001
The court laid down rules for restricting the citation of authorities, which rules are to be applied in all courts except criminal courts. The increase in the number of judgments series being available had come to be problematic for all involved, . .
Appeal fromRe Davidge 2003
Family members said that another niece had obtained gifts from the deceased by the exercise of undue influence. Several substantial gifts had been made to a niece and her family who had been more like a daughter to the deceased. Correspondence . .

Cited by:
CitedGoodchild v Branbury and others CA 15-Dec-2006
Application was made to set aside transfers of land for undue influence, and that the second transfere was aware of the deficiency in the first.
Held: The appeal suceeded, and the transfers were set aside. Chadwick LJ said: ‘A gift which is . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 January 2021; Ref: scu.189953

UCB Group Ltd v Hedworth: CA 4 Dec 2003

The defendant challenged the claimant’s right to possession under a legal charge. She appealed a finding that she had not established the undue influence of her husband, a solicitor.
Held: A lender who received a voidable security was entitled to invoke the right of subrogation in the same way, and to the same extent, as a lender who had received security which turned out to be void. The judge’s limited record of his findings made it difficult to handle the appeal. There is a clear distinction between a charge which is voidable from its inception and one which is valid and fully enforceable, when made but which may become void at some future date unless registered. The bank had obtained what it bargained for. The Butler -v- Rice principle applied in the instant case. If the Barclays charge was voidable at the instance of the defendant, Barclays must be taken to have intended to retain and keep alive any security rights to which it was entitled in the absence of an effective security, and, by parity of reasoning. UCB was in turn entitled to be subrogated to those rights.
Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Kennedy Lord Justice Longmore
[2003] EWCA Civ 1717, Times 09-Jan-2004, Gazette 29-Jan-2004
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
CitedCapital Finance v Stokes 1969
A voidable charge remains valid until avoided. ‘It was argued for the vendor that what he contracted to get was a valid legal charge, and that he has not received because the company in default of its obligation under section 95 [of the Companies . .
CitedBurston Finance Ltd v Spierway Ltd ChD 1974
The lender took a charge over a property held by a company which subsequently became void because it was not registered within the required period at Companies House.
Held: A voidable charge is a valid charge unless and until set aside: . .
CitedRhesa Shipping Co SA v Edmonds (The Popi M) HL 16-May-1985
The Popi M sank in calm seas and fair weather as a result of a large and sudden entry of water into her engine room through her shell plating. The vessel’s owners claimed against her hull and machinery underwriters, contending that the loss was . .
CitedCIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to . .
CitedCastle Phillips Finance v Piddington CA 1995
The wife charged the matrimonial home to Lloyds to secure the husband’s indebtedness. The husband subsequently agreed with Barclays for the indebtedness to be refinanced. The husband and an accomplice forged her signature on a transfer of the . .
CitedScotlife Home Loans v Hedworth CA 1996
The lender claimed possession as chargee under a legal charge granted by the respondents who filed Defences contending that the claimant had agreed to replace the secured loan and to waive its remedies for default under the charge. The claimant said . .
CitedBarbara Ann Leggatt v National Westminster Bank Plc CA 19-Oct-2000
Where a wife executed a charge over a jointly owned property to secure her joint debts, and then seventeen years later executed a replacement charge to secure borrowings of the husband and she had received independent advice, she could not assert . .
CitedGhana Commercial Bank v Chandiram PC 1960
The bank made an advance to the owner of property in Accra which was used to pay off his indebtedness to Barclays (DC and O) Ltd, secured by an equitable mortgage. The owner executed a legal mortgage in favour of the Ghana Bank, but this was . .
CitedAbbey National Building Society v Cann HL 29-Mar-1990
Registered land was bought with an advance from the plaintiff. The transfer and charge were registered one month later, but in the meantime, the buyer’s parents moved in. When the buyer defaulted, his mother resisted possession proceedings, saying . .
CitedButler v Rice 1910
The wife owned a Bristol property and a Cardiff property subject to a andpound;450 charge in favour of a bank with whom the title deeds had been deposited. The husband asked the plaintiff to lend him andpound;450 to pay off the mortgage. The . .

Cited by:
CitedSerious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 15-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether, as second mortgagee on the defendant’s properties, the claimant agency had the equitable power of marshalling of prior charges. The first chargee had charges over two properties, and sold the first, satisfying it debt, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 January 2021; Ref: scu.188416

Saunders (Executrix of the Will of Rose Maude Gallie, Deceased) v Anglia Building Society: HL 9 Nov 1970

The Appellant had signed an assignment of her lease in favour of her nephew. She said she thought the effect of it would protect her right to continue to live in the house. She now appealed rejection of her plea of non est factum.
Held: The common law doctrine of non est factum has a very narrow and limited application. The transaction must be essentially different in substance or in kind from the transaction intended. The plea is available to a narrow class of persons, namely, those who are: unable to read owing to blindness or illiteracy; or permanently or temporarily unable, through no fault of their own, to have without explanation any real understanding of the purport of a particular document, whether that lack of understanding be from defective education, illness or innate incapacity.
Lord Wilberforce said: ‘leaving aside negotiable instruments to which special rules may apply, a person who signs a document, and parts with it so that it may come into other hands, has a responsibility, that of the normal man of prudence, to take care what he signs, which, if neglected, prevents him from denying his liability under the document according to its tenor. I would add that the onus of proof in this matter rests upon him.’
Lord Reid said: ”the matter generally arises when an innocent third party has relied on a signed document in ignorance of the circumstances in which it was signed, and where he will suffer loss if the maker of the document is allowed to have it declared a nullity.’
. . And ‘The plea cannot be available to anyone who was content to sign without taking the trouble to try to find out at least the general effect of the document. Many people do frequently sign documents put before them for signature by their solicitor or other trusted advisors without making any inquiry as to their purpose or effect. But the essence of the plea non est factum is that the person signing believed that the document he signed had one character or one effect whereas in fact its character or effect was quite different. He could not have had such a belief unless he had taken steps or been given information which gave him some grounds for his belief. The amount of information he must have and the sufficiency of the particularity of his belief must depend on the circumstances of each case.’
Lord Wilberforce, Lord Reid
[1971] AC 1004, [1970] UKHL 5, [1970] 3 All ER 961, [1970] 2 WLR 1078
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedHowatson v Webb ChD 1907
The defendant, a solicitor’s clerk, pleaded non est factum to an action on a mortgage deed he had signed. He said that he had thought it to be a deed transferring property held as nominee for the solicitor.
Held: The court should make . .
CitedHowatson v Webb CA 1908
The court accepted a plea of non est factum, approving the distinction made by the trial judge between the approval of the contents and the character of the deed executed. Cozens-Hardy MR said that he approved every word of Warrington J’s judgment. . .
CitedCarlisle and Cumberland Banking Company v Bragg 1911
A party wishing to establish a plea of non est factum in order to avoid liability under a deed, must show that he had taken care in signing the document.
Held: There could not be negligence in the execution of a document unless a duty was owed . .
CitedThoroughgood’s case; Thoroughgood v Cole; Throwgood v Turnor, Moore 1584
Where a signatory is blind, and the document is read to him falsely either by the grantee or by a stranger, then the deed is not binding on him. An illiterate signatory need not execute the deed without it being read over to him, but where he . .
CitedMuskham Finance Ltd v Howard CA 1963
Non est factum limited but effective
K instructed a dealer to sell a car which K held under an hire purchase agreement. The dealer found a who wanted hire purchase terms. K signed, at the dealer’s request, a document for the purposes of the transaction. Later, the dealer told K he had . .
CitedWhelpdale’s Case 1604
Where a bond is delivered to somebody else to the use of the obligee, on being tendered is refused, the delivery of the deed was no longer effective, the obligee could not later agree to it, and the obligor could plead non est factum. . .
CitedNational Provincial Bank v Jackson CA 1886
Two sisters executed deeds relating to their property, but did not read them first or having them read out to them or explained. They said that they had relied on their brother, a solicitor.
Held: Cotton LJ said that they could not have been . .
CitedFoster v MacKinnon 1869
The court considered a plea of non est factum.
Held: Byles J set out situations where the plea was available: ‘It seems plain, on principle and on authority, that, if a blind man, or a man who cannot read, or who for some reason (not implying . .
CitedWhelpdale’s Case 1604
Where a bond is delivered to somebody else to the use of the obligee, on being tendered is refused, the delivery of the deed was no longer effective, the obligee could not later agree to it, and the obligor could plead non est factum. . .
CitedShulter’s Case 1611
Where a blind or illiterate person (here 115 years old) had a deed read over to him before it was signed, but he was mislead, he could plead non est factum. . .
CitedIn re Leighton’s Conveyance CA 1937
Rules of court provided that a person suing as a poor person should not be ordered to pay costs.
Held: The Order did not prevent the mortgagee adding to her security her costs in an action brought by the mortgagor suing as a poor person. Lord . .

Cited by:
CitedAbacus Trust Company (Isle of Man) Colyb Limited v Barr, Barr, and Barr ChD 6-Feb-2003
abacus_barrChD03
The court considered the Rule in Hastings-Bass, and specifically (1) whether the trustee’s decision is open to challenge when the failure to take a consideration into account is not attributable to a breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the . .
CitedAvon Finance Co Ltd v Bridger CA 1985
The son arranged finance for his parents to move near to him. He borrowed money to help finance it, secured by an expensive second loan. He deceived his parents into executing the loan. After the son defaulted, the plaintiff sought possession.
CitedConoco Limited v Khan and Khan CA 15-Nov-1996
The second defendant denied liability under loan agreements pleading non est factum, and saying that they had been been obtained by undue influence. . .
CitedPeekay Intermark Ltd and Another v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd ComC 25-May-2005
The claimant alleged mis-selling of an emerging markets investment product. The defendant claimed that whilst there might have been a misrepresentation, by the time the contract was formed, correct information had been provided and incorporated in . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 January 2021; Ref: scu.181653

Isabella Doris Briggs Or Broadway v Clydesdale Bank Plc: OHCS 26 May 2000

Where a guarantor sought to deny liability, asserting lack of good faith on the part of the bank, and the bank sought to explain away its failure to ensure that the guarantor was aware of the onerous nature of the guarantee by asserting that the guarantor had had independent advice, the bank could not rely upon dealings with solicitors where it was not explicit that the solicitors were giving such independent advice to the guarantors. What was good faith must depend upon the facts of each case, but in this case the situation was sufficiently unclear to have placed on the bank a duty to enquire.
Lord Macfadyen
Times 12-Sep-2000, [2000] ScotCS 138
Bailii, ScotC

Updated: 08 January 2021; Ref: scu.170384

Banco Exterior Internacional SA (Formerly Banco Exterior – UK a Limited Liability Company Incorporated Under the Laws of Spain) v Thomas and Barry the Executors of Patricia Dempsey: CA 31 Jul 1996

The bank sought to enforce a guarantee against the estate of the deceased guarantor. The executors alleged undue influence. The bank appealed.
Held: Where the other contracting party had had actual knowledge of the undue influence or misrepresentation the victim might not be held to the contract.
[1996] EWCA Civ 558, [1997] 1 WLR 221
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 December 2020; Ref: scu.140425

Barbara Ann Leggatt v National Westminster Bank Plc: CA 19 Oct 2000

Where a wife executed a charge over a jointly owned property to secure her joint debts, and then seventeen years later executed a replacement charge to secure borrowings of the husband and she had received independent advice, she could not assert that the bank was fixed with notice of the undue influence of her husband. In any event the new charge was not on its face disadvantageous to her. If the new charge had not been executed the business would have failed, and she would have been caught by the earlier charge in any event.
Times 16-Nov-2000, Gazette 02-Nov-2000, [2001] 1 FLR 563, [2000] EWCA Civ 261
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedUCB Group Ltd v Hedworth CA 4-Dec-2003
The defendant challenged the claimant’s right to possession under a legal charge. She appealed a finding that she had not established the undue influence of her husband, a solicitor.
Held: A lender who received a voidable security was entitled . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 December 2020; Ref: scu.135697

Bischoff’s Trustee v Frank: 1903

Wright J
(1903) 89 LT 188
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
Gazette 17-Dec-93, Times 22-Oct-93, Independent 22-Oct-93, [1993] 3 WLR 786, [1994] 1 AC 180, [1993] 4 All ER 417, [1993] UKHL 6

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 December 2020; Ref: scu.180573

First National Bank Plc v Walker and Another: CA 23 Nov 2000

A claim that a bank’s charge should be set aside as having been obtained by the undue influence of a co-mortgagee was parasitic upon a claim as between the co-mortgagors in family proceedings. The wife sought as against the bank to challenge the validity of the charge, but asserted the existence of the charge in the course of proceedings which continued in parallel to the possession proceedings. She could not blow hot and cold. The claim against the husband and subsequent transfer had included an explicit acknowledgement by her of the charge, and that decided the issue between her and the bank.
Times 13-Feb-2001, [2000] EWCA Civ 3015, [2001] 1 FCR 21, [2001] 1 FLR 505, [2001] Fam Law 182
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedSmith v Skanska Construction Services Ltd QBD 29-Jul-2008
The court considered whether the driver of a vehicle involved in a fatal road accident in Thailand was driving within the authority of the UK employers. The driver was not an employee but had authority to use company vehicles for tasks for the . .
[2008] EWHC 1776 (QB)

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 December 2020; Ref: scu.80561

CIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another: HL 21 Oct 1993

Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to the existence of undue influence only because a loan was to be made in joint names. It must have some actual notice of that undue influence. In cases of undue influence disadvantage is not a necessary ingredient of the cause of action. It is not essential that the transaction should be disadvantageous to the pressurised or influenced person in any way. A balance is to be found between the protection of a wife from improper pressure, and the need for banks to have predictable consequences of making secured loans. ‘What, then, was known to the plaintiff that could put it on inquiry so as to fix it with constructive notice? So far as the plaintiff was aware, the transaction consisted of a loan to husband and wife to finance the discharge of an existing mortgage on [the matrimonial home], and as to the balance to be applied in buying a holiday home. The loan was advanced to husband and wife jointly. There was nothing to indicate to the plaintiff that this was anything other than a normal advance to husband and wife for their joint benefit.’
Lord Browne-Wilkinson
Gazette 17-Dec-1993, Independent 22-Oct-1993, Times 22-Oct-1993, [1994] 1 AC 200, [1993] 3 WLR 802, [1993] 4 All ER 433, [1993] UKHL 7
Bailii
Citing:
CitedNational Westminster Bank plc v Morgan HL 7-Mar-1985
Undue influence was alleged.
Held: Equity avoids dispositions of property procured by the improper or unconscientious use of the influence of one person over another, that cannot be explained on the grounds of friendship, charity or other . .
[1985] AC 686, [1985] UKHL 2, [1985] 1 All ER 821, [1985] ANZ Conv R 251, [1985] 2 WLR 588
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another CA 22-May-1992
A bank leaving a husband to explain a proposed charge over the matrimonial home to his wife to secure his business debts, could not enforce that charge against her. There was a presumption of undue influence in the husband which made the charge . .
Gazette 15-Jul-92, [1992] 4 All ER 983, [1993] QB 109
CitedAllcard v Skinner CA 1887
allcard_skinnerCA1887
The donor had parted with almost all her property. She now sought to have the transaction set aside for undue influence.
Held: Where a wife has entered into a gratuitous transaction with her husband, the burden was on the husband as donee to . .
(1887) 36 Ch D 145
CitedPoosathurai v Kannappa Chettiar PC 1919
. .
[1919] LR 47 1A
DisapprovedBank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Aboody CA 1989
In a case where the defendant said that a mortgage had been signed from undue pressure the court may find actual undue influence as opposed to presumed undue influence. Slade LJ said: ‘Ever since the judgments of this court in Allcard v Skinner a . .
[1992] 4 All ER 955, [1989] 2 WLR 759, [1990] 1 QB 923

Cited by:
CitedUCB Corporate Services Limited v Williams CA 2-May-2002
The wife of a borrower sought to defend a claim for possession of the property by the chargor. She claimed that he signature had been obtained by an equitable fraud.
Held: Undue influence occurred when improper means of persuasion were used to . .
Times 27-May-02, Gazette 13-Jun-02, [2002] EWCA Civ 555
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
Gazette 17-Dec-93, Times 22-Oct-93, Independent 22-Oct-93, [1993] 3 WLR 786, [1994] 1 AC 180, [1993] 4 All ER 417, [1993] UKHL 6
CitedUCB Group Ltd v Hedworth CA 4-Dec-2003
The defendant challenged the claimant’s right to possession under a legal charge. She appealed a finding that she had not established the undue influence of her husband, a solicitor.
Held: A lender who received a voidable security was entitled . .
[2003] EWCA Civ 1717, Times 09-Jan-04, Gazette 29-Jan-04
CitedSandra Estelle Fielding v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc CA 11-Feb-2004
The husband and wife had signed a bank mandate allowing the bank to act upon the authorisation of either of them. The wife complained that the bank should not be able to recover from her any sums expended by the husband.
Held: The mandate . .
[2004] EWCA Civ 64, Times 26-Feb-04
CitedVale v Armstrong, Armstrong ChD 21-May-2004
The claimant sought to set aside a transfer of his house to the defendants made at an undervalue and under an enduring power of attorney, who had charged it to raise money for their business. He had received independent advice.
Held: The . .
[2004] EWHC 1160 (Ch)
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v Boulter and Another HL 26-Oct-1999
The question of whether notice of certain facts amounted to constructive notice of other facts is a question of law. Where it was claimed that a party should be exempt from liability under a document which it was claimed was signed because of . .
Times 26-Oct-99, Gazette 03-Nov-99, [1999] UKHL 39, [1999] 4 All ER 513, [1999] 3 EGLR 88, (2000) 32 HLR 170, [2000] Fam Law 25, (2000) 79 P and CR D1, [2000] CP Rep 16, [1999] 49 EG 97, [1999] 2 FLR 986, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep Bank 29, [1999] 3 FCR 529, [1999] 1 WLR 1919, [1999] EG 121, [1999] NPC 124
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
Times 17-Oct-01, [2001] UKHL 44, [2001] 3 WLR 1021, [2002] 2 AC 773, [2002] HLR 4, [2002] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 343, [2001] NPC 147, [2001] Fam Law 880, [2001] 43 EGCS 184, [2001] 2 All ER (Comm) 1061, [2001] 4 All ER 449, [2001] 2 FLR 1364, [2002] 1 P and CR DG14, [2001] 3 FCR 481

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 December 2020; Ref: scu.79133

Barclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another: CA 22 May 1992

A bank leaving a husband to explain a proposed charge over the matrimonial home to his wife to secure his business debts, could not enforce that charge against her. There was a presumption of undue influence in the husband which made the charge defective.
Gazette 15-Jul-1992, [1992] 4 All ER 983, [1993] QB 109
Bailii
Cited by:
Appeal fromBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
Gazette 17-Dec-93, Times 22-Oct-93, Independent 22-Oct-93, [1993] 3 WLR 786, [1994] 1 AC 180, [1993] 4 All ER 417, [1993] UKHL 6
CitedCIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to . .
Gazette 17-Dec-93, Independent 22-Oct-93, Times 22-Oct-93, [1994] 1 AC 200, [1993] 3 WLR 802, [1993] 4 All ER 433, [1993] UKHL 7

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 December 2020; Ref: scu.78212

Alliance and Leicester Plc v Slayford and Another: CA 12 Oct 2000

Property was transferred into a divorcing husband’s name, and his new partner signed a form disclaiming any rights as against the lender. After possession proceedings, she later asserted that her consent had been obtained by the undue influence of her partner and that her equitable interest was an overriding one. The applicant applied to amend the pleadings to add to the claim for possession a claim against the original chargor for the debt secured.
Held: This was not an abuse of process even though the result might be that the partner’s insolvency came to defeat the new partner’s equitable interest. It was not an abuse of process, where a lender seeking to take possession of a mortgaged property was faced with an assertion of an interest by a resident spouse, for that lender to seek as an alternative, the bankruptcy of the borrower under the loan agreement itself. Such an action was clearly available to them. An occupier in such circumstances could now taking advantage of the more detailed exposition of rights contained in the Act which would be an appropriate way of establishing the protection to be given.
Gazette 26-Oct-2000, Times 19-Dec-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 257
Bailii
Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996
England and Wales

Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.77751

New Sombrero Phosphate Co v Erlanger: CA 26 Feb 1877

Sir George Jessel MR said: : ‘. . persons in a fiduciary position must make a full and fair disclosure when they are about to sell property to those towards whom they stand in that relation’
Sir George Jessel MR
(1877) 5 Ch D 73
England and Wales
Cited by:
At CAErlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate Company HL 1878
Rescission needs Restitutio in Integrum
A syndicate, of which Erlanger (Orse Erlinger) was the head, purchased from an insolvent company an island, said to contain valuable mines of phosphates. Erlanger, who managed the purchase, prepared to get up a company to take over the island and . .
(1878) LR 3 App Cas 1218, [1874-80] All ER 271

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.620169

Morley v Loughnan: 1893

Wright J in the context of this claim for undue influence, relied on a passage from an earlier case in which Wilmot CJ had said, ‘Let the hand receiving [a gift] be ever so chaste, yet, if it comes through a polluted channel, the obligation of restitution will follow it’.
Wright J
[1893] Ch 736
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedSoutzos v Asombang and Others ChD 21-Jun-2011
The claimant had obtained a freezing order against the defendants. His claim having been dismissed, the court now considered if and what damages should be paid under the cross-undertaking he had given.
Held: Setting out and applying the . .
[2011] EWHC 1582 (Ch)

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.441144

Gill v Woodall and Others: CA 14 Dec 2010

References: [2010] EWCA Civ 1430, [2010] NPC 126, [2011] 3 WLR 85, [2011] WTLR 251, [2011] Ch 380
Links: Bailii
Coram: Neuberger MR, Lloyd, Jackson LJJ
Ratio: The court considered the authorities as to the capacity to make a will, and gave detailed guidance.
Held: As a matter of common sense and authority, the fact that a will has been properly executed, after being prepared by a solicitor and read over to the testator, raises a very strong presumption that it represents the testator’s intentions at the relevant time.
There is no legal fetter to the general principle of testamentary freedom by which a person may leave his or her assets as he or she sees fit, whether such disposition be unexpected, inexplicable, unfair and even improper.
The grant of probate to the will had been revoked. The Society which was the residuary beneficiary of the will now appealed. The testatrix had been said to have been under the excessive influence of a domineering husband, and the gift had been contrary to her expressed views of the Society.
Lord Nueberger MR said: ‘Wills frequently give rise to feelings of disappointment or worse on the part of relatives and other would-be beneficiaries. Human nature being what it is, such people will often be able to find evidence, or to persuade themselves that evidence exists, which shows that the will did not, could not, or was unlikely to, represent the intention of the testatrix, or that the testatrix was in some way mentally affected so as to cast doubt on the will. If judges were too ready to accept such contentions, it would risk undermining what may be regarded as a fundamental principle of English law, namely that people should in general be free to leave their property as they choose, and it would run the danger of encouraging people to contest wills, which could result in many estates being diminished by substantial legal costs. ‘
and, of the proposition in In Re Fuld ‘when all is dark, it is dangerous for a court to claim that it can see the light.’, that ‘that observation applies with almost equal force when all is murky and uncertain.’
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • Cited – Perrins v Holland and Others; In re Perrins, deceased CA (Bailii, [2010] EWCA Civ 840, [2010] WLR (D) 196, WLRD, (2010) 13 ITELR 405, [2011] 2 WLR 1086)
    The testator had given instructions for his will and received a draft will. The judge had found that he had capacity to make the will when he gave instructions but not when it was executed. The will having been made in accordance with his . .
  • Appeal from – Gill v Woodall and Others ChD (Bailii, [2009] EWHC B34 (Ch), [2009] EWHC 834 (Ch))
    The claimant challenged her late mother’s will which had left the entire estate to a charity. She asserted lack of knowledge and approval and coercion, and also an estoppel. The will included a note explaining that no gift had been made because she . .
  • Cited – Fulton v Andrew HL ((1875) LR 7 HL 448)
    The will was professionally drawn but through agency of the executors, specific legatees and residuary legatees. The Court of Probate directed the case to be tried at the assizes where the judge asked the opinion of the jury on a number of questions . .
  • Cited – Tyrrell v Painton CA ([1894] 1 P 151)
    The rule throwing upon the party propounding a will the burden of showing that it expresses the true will of the deceased is not confined to cases where the will is prepared by a person taking a benefit under it. After reference to Barry v Butlin . .
  • Cited – Gregson v Taylor ChD ([1917] P 256)
    Hill J said: ‘when it is proved that a will has been read over to or by a capable testator, and he then executes it’, the ‘grave and strong presumption’ of knowledge and approval ‘can be rebutted only by the clearest evidence.’ . .
  • Cited – Fuller v Strum CA ([2002] WTLR 199, Times 22-Jan-02, Gazette 14-Feb-02, Bailii, [2001] EWCA Civ 1879, [2002] 2 All ER 87, [2002] 1 WLR 1087)
    The appellant challenged a finding that only part of a will was valid. The part made a gift to his son, ‘albeit very grudgingly’, saying ‘I hate him like poison, that Irish bastard.’
    Held: The onus on the propounder of a will to show that it . .
  • Cited – In re Morris Deceased ChD ([1971] P 62, [1970] 1 All ER 1057, [1970] 2 WLR 865)
    A mistake was made in the drafting of a codicil by which, inter alia, the testatrix had revoked cl 7 of her will. It was clear from the evidence that the testatrix had never intended to revoke the whole of that clause but only to revoke the . .
  • Cited – In the Estate of Fuld, decd (No 3) ChD ([1968] P 675, [1967] 3 WLR 401, [1967] 3 All ER 318)
    The deceased had spent relatively equal periods in two or more countries. The parties disputed his domicile.
    Held: A blind adherence to foreign law can not be always expected of an English Court. The legal relationship between a person and the . .
  • Cited – Perrins v Holland and Others; In re Perrins, deceased CA (Bailii, [2010] EWCA Civ 840, [2010] WLR (D) 196, WLRD, (2010) 13 ITELR 405, [2011] 2 WLR 1086)
    The testator had given instructions for his will and received a draft will. The judge had found that he had capacity to make the will when he gave instructions but not when it was executed. The will having been made in accordance with his . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Wharton v Bancroft and Others ChD (Bailii, [2011] EWHC 3250 (Ch))
    Mr Wharton anticipated his imminent death. He made a will leaving everything to his long time partner in anticipation of their marriage, married her and died a few days later. The will made no provision for his first wife or their now adult . .
  • Cited – Schrader v Schrader ChD (Bailii, [2013] EWHC 466 (Ch))
    Brothers contested their late mother’s will, one saying that the later one was made when she lacked capacity and was under the undue influence of the other.
    Held: The evidence of one brother that he had taken no significant part in the . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 05 November 2019
Ref: 427175

Honeyman’s Executors v Sharp; scs 14 Mar 1978

References: 1978 SC 223, [1978] ScotCS CSOH_4, 1979 SLT 177
Links: Bailii
Coram: Lord Maxwell
The action concludes for declarator that a purported gift by the deceased to the defender of four valuable paintings by the French artist Boudin falls to be reduced and for certain consequential relief. Though the word ‘undue’ is not used in the pursuers’ pleas-in-law, the action is in substance laid on the principle usually described as ‘undue influence.’