Kings North Trust Ltd v Bell: CA 1986

The wife claimed to have signed a legal charge in favour of the plaintiffs by virtue of her husband’s fraudulent misrepresentation. The charge secured the business borrowings of the husband. She did not get independent advice.
Held: The bank had entrusted the charge to the husband to have it signed by her. He was therefore acting as the bank’s agent, and it was bound by his misrepresentations, and could not enforce the charge. Dillon LJ made it a necessary condition of such a finding that the creditor had entrusted to the husband the task of obtaining his wife’s signature.
[1986] 1 All ER 423, [1986] 1 WLR 119
England and Wales
Citing:
AppliedChaplin and Co Ltd v Brammall CA 1908
The plaintiffs, having agreed to supply goods to the defendant’s husband on credit if his wife would guarantee payment by him of their price, sent to the husband a form of guarantee, in order that he might obtain his wife’s signature to it, leaving . .

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: 11 January 2021; Ref: scu.180578