swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Undue Influence - From: 2003 To: 2003
This page lists 4 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019.
Re Davidge [2003] WTLR 959
2003
Undue Influence
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 suggested that the deceased had not properly comprehended what the documents achieved. Held: The failure by the beneficiary to ensure that her aunt had made a full and informed choice placed her, as executor, under an obligation in conscience to make full compensation to the deceased's estate even though she was not responsible for any misleading or wrong advice.
1 Citers
Franklyn Dailey v Harriet Dailey [2003] UKPC 65
2 Oct 2003
PC
Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton, Sir Andrew Leggatt, Sir Philip Otton
Family, Commonwealth, Undue Influence
PC (British Virgin Islands) The husband and wife had developed a business together. Transfers between the parties had taken place and there were suspicions about misappropriation of money. Held: The relationship of husband and wife does not, as a matter of law, raise a presumption of undue influence. The trial judge was here entitled to hold that the transaction was at arm's length, and the wife could not set it aside. The husband had failed to establish his claim that the respondent had taken money from this account for her own use. The amount which he took from the account fell to be divided between the parties equally.
1 Cites
[ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
Jennings and Another v Cairns; CA 18-Nov-2003 - Times, 25 November 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 1935
UCB Group Ltd v Hedworth [2003] EWCA Civ 1717; Times, 09 January 2004; Gazette, 29 January 2004
4 Dec 2003
CA
Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Kennedy Lord Justice Longmore
Land, Undue Influence
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.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
