Watt or Forsyth (Assisted Person) v the Royal Bank of Scotland Plc: SCS 26 Jul 1999

It appeared to the creditor that the wife had already had the benefit of professional legal advice, and it did not recommend that she should seek independent legal advice.
Lord Macfadyen
[1999] ScotCS 181, 2000 SLT 1295
Bailii, ScotC
Cited by:
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 January 2021; Ref: scu.170422