Search results
A case summary of the UK House of Lords decision on undue influence in mortgage agreements involving married couples. The bank must ensure independent legal advice for both parties and protect the wife's interest.
A comprehensive analysis of the House of Lords decision on the presumption of undue influence in third party suretyship transactions. Learn the key points, facts, judgments and criticisms of the case.
Oct 11, 2001 · The case involved a wife who charged her interest in her home to secure her husband's debt to a bank. She claimed the bank was on notice of her husband's undue influence over her. The House of Lords allowed the bank's appeal and dismissed her claim.
Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) [2001] UKHL 44 (11 October 2001) is a leading case relevant for English land law and English contract law on the circumstances under which actual and presumed undue influence can be argued to vitiate consent to a contract.
In Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Etridge (No 2) [1998] 4 All ER 705, 722, para 49, the Court of Appeal said that if the transaction is 'one into which no competent solicitor could properly advise the wife to enter', the availability of legal advice is insufficient to avoid the bank being fixed with constructive notice. It follows from the views ...
RBS v Etridge. Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge [1998] 4 All ER 705 House of Lords. The case concerned a number of conjoined appeals concerning banks seeking possession of homes where a wife had signed a charge or mortgage agreeing to secure the debts of the husband on the family home.
In October 1993 the bank made a formal demand for payment by the company of the sums it owed the bank and, on failing to receive payment, appointed receivers of the company. The sum owed by the company to the bank was £270,000 or thereabouts.
