Lake v Brutton: 9 Jul 1856

Where a mortgage was taken in part in respect of a sum for which the mortgagee represented himself to the mortgagor as being liable as a surety for the latter, and such representation was erroneous, to the knowledge of the mortgagee : Held, that to that extent the security could not be supported.
A debtor deposited a policy with his creditor as a security. Afterwards the debtor; with a surety who did not know of the deposit, covenantal with the creditor for payment of the debt, and contemporaneously the debtor executed a deed of counter security to the surety, neither deed referring to the deposit of the policy. Subsequently the debtor assigned the policy to the creditor as a security. Held, that the surety, on paying the debt, was entitled to the policy.

Citations:

[1856] EngR 763 (B), (1856) 8 De G M and G 440

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Land, Contract

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.291518