First National Securities v Hegerty: CA 1984

The husband had forged his wife’s signature on the loan application and on the charge of the house held by himself and his wife as joint tenants. He had left the country, and the plaintiff sought to enforce the charge, and ex parte obtained an order nisi charging the husband’s interest in the house. The wife petitioned for divorce. The bank appealed the master’s refusal to make the charging order absolute, and the High Court upheld the appeal and refused to allow the matter to transfer to the Family Division.
Held: The wife’s appeal failed. The judge had identified and considered the correct issues. The plaintiffs had not delayed their action, and had begun it before the divorce. Stephenson LJ said that the courts should not defeat claims from legitimate creditors by use of a matrimonial jurisdiction, though enforcement of a charging order might be deferred until any application under section 30 of the 1925 Act had been dealt with,


Stephenson LJ


[1984] 3 WLR 769, [1984] 3 All ER 641, [1985] QB 850, [1984] Fam Law 315


Law of Property Act 1925 30, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973


England and Wales

Land, Family, Litigation Practice

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.248852