Habermann v Koehler and Another (No 2): CA 22 Nov 2000

A house owner allowed occupiers in and gave a informal option for them to buy it. He later charged it and sold the property to the chargee in satisfaction of the debt. Before buying it the mortgagee enquired of the occupiers as to whether they intended to purchase the property, and their reply did not mention the option. The court held that the enquiry was sufficient enquiry and that though the option was capable of being an overriding interest, the reply was in terms which did not protect that option. The land was taken not subject to the option. The relevant time was on the purchase, not the taking of the mortgage.

Citations:

Times 22-Nov-2000

Statutes:

Land Registration Act 1925 70(1)(g)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Registered Land

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.81109