Leolin Price, QC and Bernard Devlin for the wife. It was addressed to Mr and Mrs Nadeem and was in the following terms: (a) 210,000 to enable you to purchase a 32 years lease over [the property] for 210,000. There are numerous examples of UI cases where many types of fraudulent behavior have been conducted by the principal debtors in order to finalize the transactions. Counterclaim dismissed. a case where the wife, seeking rescission, must be in a position to make restitutio in integrum. The property is Mr and Mrs Nadeem's matrimonial home. The Bank concedes that the transaction was speculative and may have been imprudent, but it contends that it was not manifestly disadvantageous to Mrs Nadeem. In Dunbar Bank Plc v. Nadeem [1998] the bank incorrectly used an all-moneys form instead of a limited one. Arguably, this may pertain to be evidence of equitys unequal treatment of the sexes. By the second agreement she did not obtain a freestanding loan, whether of 210,000 or 105,000, which she was free to use as she thought fit. Nonetheless the defendant lost her case as the bank claimed it in no way intended to enforce the all-moneys clause, hence the transaction was not to her manifest disadvantage. This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged. Auchmuty states the current law relating to UI flows from a judicial view that the formal legal equality of women obviates any need for special equitable protection, which she expands upon in her article Men Behaving Badly: An Analysis of English Undue Influence Cases. The Bank submits that in the circumstances the Judge ought not to have held that the equity of redemption of the property, which apparently had a value of 140,000 and in which Mrs Nadeem was acquiring a joint beneficial interest, was illusory. Order: Cross appeal allowed. An example of data being processed may be a unique identifier stored in a cookie. 457; [1998] 3 F.C.R. The Bank sought to enforce its legal charge, and Mrs Nadeem counterclaimed to have the legal charge set aside as against her for undue influence. The archive is . 40 keywords for enhanced search. It was in fact some 560,000, but the Judge found that this may not have been known to the Bank until after the completion of its own security. Subscribers can access the reported version of this case. This is another in the succession of cases which have fallen for determination since the decisions of the House of Lords in Barclays Bank plc v O'Brien and Another[1994] 1 FCR 357 and CIBC Mortgages plc v Pitt[1994] 1 FCR 374. 12-2, April 2005, Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review Nbr. advanced to her and her husband jointly, but the interest in the equity of redemption which she obtained by the use of the Banks money. Consequently, the wife was rendering herself liable, and giving her interest in the matrimonial home as security, not only for her joint debts with the husband but also for debts in excess of 1.25m which the husband owed the bank. First, there was the agreement or arrangement between the Husband, and the Wife that he would procure for her a half interest in the new lease to be granted by the landlord in respect of the matrimonial home if she would join with the Husband in borrowing, from the Bank the sum needed for that and other purposes and charging the new lease to the bank to secure it. enduring contemporary design archives in history. Court of Appeal The issue before the court was whether a wife had established a case of presumed undue influence and whether the transaction at issue was manifestly disadvantageous to her. [1994] 1 WLR 129. For the surrender of the remainder of his existing lease, therefore, Mr Nadeem was in a position to acquire an extended lease of his matrimonial home at a price which was roughly 190,000 less than its estimated value. Voluntary manslaughter is pleaded as a special and partial defence to murder. In the meantime, however, he had been offered the opportunity to acquire a longer lease of the property in place of his existing lease for a sum of 210,000. Confusingly, the law may be said to maintain inequalities while professing to maintain equality in that it separates the idea of (equal) people from the (unequal) property they own. The law has been said to overlook and excuse such behaviour, from claiming the neutrality of legal and equitable doctrines and the role of equity towards women, to pretending balance exists where in fact there is none. As Fehlberg states judges oversimplify to a large degree the emotional and economic reasons why women provide security. Unconscionable conduct requires a conscious act of Mr Nadeem was unable to make interest payments when they fell due, or to re-mortgage the property, and on 22nd February 1994 the Bank made demand for repayment of the facility by letters addressed separately to Mr and Mrs Nadeem. . Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments. John Cherryman, QC and John Horan for the bank. In the course of argument before us, Mrs Nadeem challenged the need to establish manifest disadvantage. However, the matter was fully argued and as it gives rise to problems likely to arise in other cases it may assist if I indicate what appear to me to be the appropriate principles to apply. When the wife signed she did so because her husband told her to and not because she understood the transaction. Subscribers are able to see the list of results connected to your document through the topics and citations Vincent found. In this action the plaintiff bank, Dunbar Bank plc ("the bank"), seeks to enforce as against both defendants a charge by way of legal mortgage dated 9 May 1991 over their joint leasehold interest in a house at 152 Pavilion Road, London SW1. The result would be that the Bank would then enjoy a legal charge over the whole of the beneficial interest in the lease as security for the whole of the liability. All the accounts were repayable on demand. The byproduct of which, as we are currently feeling due to the present lending crisis, would be an inescapable slow down of the economy. So to do was to impose a condition not warranted by the obligation to make restitution and, therefore, contrary to the decision of this court in. Auchmuty argues that Morally reprehensible behaviour by men is so common as to seem normal and acceptable and, therefore, unworthy of comment, being why little fuss is made in such cases and why the Courts are concerned to protect the bank and not the women. Britannia Building Societyv Pugh [1997] 2 FLR 7 at p. As such, during Etridge new guidelines were established which state the precautions that should be taken by commercial lenders to prevent mortgages being set aside by a co-signatory to. Since its founding in 1910, DUNBAR is proof that authentic design expressed with craft is an honest guide through time. refused to do so, either by setting the charge aside in part, or by imposing terms on the relief sought. Our company's unclaimed property services make the management of unclaimed property funds and assets accessible, risk-averse, and practical. The condition which the Judge imposed was, however, wrong in principle. This was given by the solicitor who also acted for her husband and his company. Featured above SILVER in search results. This lies in the fact that the transaction was intended, at least by the Bank, to be short-term bridging finance to be repaid by a sale or re-mortgage of the property in the near future. In the circumstances the transaction would not have been held to be manifestly disadvantageous to the wife were it not for the fact that the charge expressly made the wife liable on her personal covenant for all of the husband's debts; this factor made the transaction as a whole manifestly disadvantageous to the wife. 629; (1999) 31 H.L.R. While it is plausible that women in these situations are indeed subject to domestic and social pressures that might cloud their judgment, so are many other people who agree to other forms of contracts, yet men are not generally rescued should they agree to extortionate loan agreements due to business pressures, domestic difficulties or simply because of a failure to read the terms. It was no part of the bargain made by any of the three parties involved that there should be a several loan to the Wife of any proportion of the joint loan of 260,000. ACCEPT, or avoid on the grounds of duress had to be able to make restitutio in integrum, (or in modern terminology, counter restitution, see, to intervene in the enforcement of legal rights. I have to say that, although the Defence does not in terms differentiate between actual and presumed undue influence, I read it in the same way as Mr Cherryman. She did not read the letter before signing and, if she had read it, she would not have understood it. The total indebtedness on these accounts at the end of 1990 was approximately 1.267m and interest was payable at a rate of some 50,000 a quarter. Next Document. If women are capable of understanding the consequences of having a first legal charge, then why not a second? By 1990 the lease had only some 3 years unexpired, though Mr Nadeem may have enjoyed security of tenure under the Rent Acts. when you come to consider what is the exact relief to which a person is entitled in a case of misrepresentation it seems to me to be this, and nothing more, that he is entitled to have the contract rescinded, and is entitled accordingly to all the incidents and consequences of such rescission. Hoovers Direct Submit Data Distribution. He may well also have thought it expedient to give her some protection in case his precarious financial position disintegrated further, because if he did not take the opportunity to acquire the new lease, at least in part for his wife, it would be available in its entirety for his creditors, leaving her without a roof over her head. It seems to me that when you are dealing with innocent misrepresentation you must understand that proposition that he is to be replaced in statu quo with this limitation that he is not to be replaced in exactly the same position in all respects, otherwise he would be entitled to recover damages, but is to be replaced in his position so far as regards the rights and obligations which have been created by the contract into which he has been induced to enter. View examples of our professional work here. One might note her lack of economic analysis as palpable, thus letting down some of the other observant criticisms she does make. An alternative to lists of cases, the Precedent Map makes it easier to establish which ones may be of most relevance to your research and prioritise further reading. Manifest disadvantage had to be shown in order to establish a claim of presumed undue influence, but only damage if actual undue influence shown. Auchmuty states that lobbying, education policies and the reassignment of gender roles will create legal reform in the area, yet no policies are mentioned to remedy the imbalance she claims. At the beginning of 1991 Mr Nadeem was in arrears to the Bank for approximately 32,000 in respect of the interest payable in September 1990 and was unable to pay the 52,000 interest which had fallen due in December 1990. He approached the Bank to provide the finance for the acquisition of the new lease. But there is in fact convincing evidence that no such change was intended, the significance of which I think the Judge may understandably have overlooked since no particular reliance was placed upon it for this purpose. On the face of it, therefore, Mrs Nadeem covenanted to be personally liable for and charged her interest with not only the 260,000 advanced to her and her husband to enable the property to be acquired and Mr Nadeem's accounts to be "regularised" but also Mr Nadeem's other liabilities to the Bank which were in excess of 1.267m. Dunbar Bank plc v Nadeem [1998] 3 All ER 876. Alleghany Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway, owns and supports property and casualty reinsurance and insurance operating subsidiaries. Mr Nadeem was a solicitor in sole practice. Macklin v Dowsett [2004] EWCA Civ 904 and Dunbar Bank plc v Nadeem, 4 All ER 705, at 730 Morgan: National Westminster Bank plc v. Morgan [1985] 1 AC 686Nadeem: Dunbar Bank plc v. Nadeem and another, 215,000 by the timethe sale was expected to take place. At the beginning of 1991 Mr Nadeem was in arrears to the Bank for approximately 32,000 in respect of the interest payable in September 1990 and was unable to pay the 52,000 interest which had fallen due in December 1990. TSB Bank plc v Camfield[1995] 2 FCR 252; [1995] 1 WLR 430; [1995] 1 All ER 254. Seen through his eyes, the transaction was obviously beneficial to his wife and was intended by him to be for her benefit. The facts, which are unusual, can be stated as follows. In El Ajou v. Dollar Land Holdings Plc . any defence or indeed seek to defend the action as far as he was concerned. The explanation which Mr Nadeem gave in evidence was that he thought that his wife should have an interest in the property as he himself was "getting on". Instead, the test for whether the lender should be put on notice now appears to be whether: the transaction does not appear to be of financial advantage to the wife; and, there is a substantial risk in procuring the wife to act as surety that the husband has committed a legal or equitable wrong that may entitle the wife to have the transaction set aside. That is the extent of her enrichment. Family Court Reports. The applicant for an order for a transaction to be set aside on the ground of undue influence or for any other invalidating tendency, as they were described by Lord Browne-wilkinson in, . To counter this, one might argue any such loan application form should be amended to take this into account by requiring confirmation of sexual preference. The husband's financial position continued to deteriorate. This direction took effect when, as was foreseeable, Mrs Nadeem was unable to make the payment specified in the order. They each proceeded merely on the footing that he knew best what was to be done in relation to financial and legal matters. [20] Smith New Court Securities Ltd v Scrimgeour Vickers (Asset Management) Ltd [1997] AC 254, 262. Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the worlds leading publishers. if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[300,250],'swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-3','ezslot_4',125,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-3-0'); Times 01-Jul-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1027, [1998] 3 All ER 876, [1998] 2 FLR 457, [1998] 3 FCR 629, (1999) 31 HLR 402, [1998] Fam Law 595if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[336,280],'swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-4','ezslot_7',113,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-swarb_co_uk-medrectangle-4-0'); Cited Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Aboody CA 1989 In a case where the defendant said that a mortgage had been signed from undue pressure the court may find actual undue influence as opposed to presumed undue influence. As Nourse LJ said at page 434H: Mr Cherryman says that there can be no question of the equity being subjected to terms, such terms only being appropriate where they are necessary to procure restitutio in integrum, a doctrine which has no application here because there is nothing for the wife to give back and no cause for her to provide compensation.. Both parties are dissatisfied with the order and appeal to this Court. To avoid this injustice she must make restitutio in integrum by repaying to the Bank 105,00, being one half of the money advanced by the Bank for the acquisition of the property with simple interest at an ordinary commercial rate. Accordingly, the banks cross-appeal would be allowed and the wifes appeal dismissed. (b) 50,000 to be used to pay outstanding interest payments on the account of Mr M Nadeem in our books., The remaining terms of the facility letter made it clear that the outstanding balances of the loan were to be repayable forthwith on demand and that , The security for the loan will consist of a first legal charge over a [new] lease .. over [the property].. The short-term nature of the loan was confirmed in a subsequent letter of 3rd February 1992 from the Bank to Mr Nadeem in which the Bank stated: The purpose of the facility was to give you some time to have the property re-mortgaged.. Premium. The Deputy Judge also ordered that in default of such payment by the specified date, there should be an immediate order for possession of the property, such order not to be enforced before 7th April 1997. It sets aside transactions obtained by the exercise of undue influence because, such conduct is unconscionable. In these circumstances it seems to me that the right or advantage acquired by the Wife which she was bound to restore as a condition of rescission was the beneficial interest in the lease granted by the landlord and not a proportion of the debt secured by the legal charge. As such, it was held whether the solicitors advice to her was competent or independent was an irrelevant consideration as she would have entered into the charge whatever [the solicitor] had said because she believed in her husbands ability to make a success of the new business. Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete. technology developed exclusively by vLex editorially enriches legal information to make it accessible, with instant translation into 14 languages for enhanced discoverability and comparative research. The new lease was to be for a term of 33 years from September 1990. The influence was not undue -> Why? This purported to make each of the mortgagors jointly and severally liable for all moneys and liabilities owed by either of them on any account. In my view it follows that the Wife is not now in a position to restore to the Husband the unencumbered interest which she obtained from him. By its cross-appeal the Bank contends that Mrs Nadeem has not established a case for having the Legal Charge set aside. Dunbar Bank Plc v Nadeem Court of Appeal (Civil Division), 18 June 1998 Subject: Real property Keywords: Charges; Restitution; Spouses; Undue influence Where Reported: [1998] 3 All E.R. In the meantime, however, he had been offered the opportunity to acquire a longer lease of the property in place of his existing lease for a sum of 210,000. A gifted her property to the sisterhood which she joined. 11-2, June 2002, Journal of Financial Crime Nbr. Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments. The consequence is that the remedy of rescission is not now available to her. Britannia Building Society v Pugh (unreported) 10 July 1996. If the complainant proved the actual existence of a relationship under which the complainant generally reposed trust and confidence in the wrongdoer, the existence of such a relationship raised the presumption of undue influence and, in the absence of evidence disproving undue influence, the complainant would succeed in setting aside the impugned transaction merely by proof that the complainant reposed trust and confidence in the wrongdoer without having to prove that the wrongdoer exerted actual undue influence. [1990] 1 QB 923, Followed in Dunbar Bank plc v Nadeem [1998] 3 All ER 876 ; Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Aboody [1990] 1 QB 923, at 967. The first is that 50,000 of the joint loan facility of 260,000 was to be applied by the Bank to meet Mr Nadeems own indebtedness to the Bank. undue influence of the Husband I would have concluded that it could not now be set aside. All the accounts were repayable on demand. Dunbar Bank plc v Nadeem; [1998] 3 FCR 629. She was obtaining a beneficial interest in the matrimonial home for the first time. The Bank demanded payment of the amount of the facility in the sum of 332,379.64, being the amount owed under the facility at the date of the letters. Sometime before completion the Bank learned that National Westminster Plc was proposing to take a second charge over the new lease. Undue influence, the elderly and equity release schemes. In the present case it is inescapable that there must have been two agreements. She always signed all documents dealing with financial matters simply because her husband told her to sign. Tel: 0795 457 9992, or email david@swarb.co.uk, Lincolnshire County Council v Safeway Stores Plc: Admn 19 Apr 1999, Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Aboody, British Airways Plc v British Airline Pilots Association: QBD 23 Jul 2019, Wright v Troy Lucas (A Firm) and Another: QBD 15 Mar 2019, Hayes v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax Loan Interest Relief Disallowed): FTTTx 23 Jun 2020, Ashbolt and Another v Revenue and Customs and Another: Admn 18 Jun 2020, Indian Deluxe Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Other): FTTTx 5 Jun 2020, Productivity-Quality Systems Inc v Cybermetrics Corporation and Another: QBD 27 Sep 2019, Thitchener and Another v Vantage Capital Markets Llp: QBD 21 Jun 2019, McCarthy v Revenue and Customs (High Income Child Benefit Charge Penalty): FTTTx 8 Apr 2020, HU206722018 and HU196862018: AIT 17 Mar 2020, Parker v Chief Constable of the Hampshire Constabulary: CA 25 Jun 1999, Christofi v Barclays Bank Plc: CA 28 Jun 1999, Demite Limited v Protec Health Limited; Dayman and Gilbert: CA 24 Jun 1999, Demirkaya v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 23 Jun 1999, Aravco Ltd and Others, Regina (on the application of) v Airport Co-Ordination Ltd: CA 23 Jun 1999, Manchester City Council v Ingram: CA 25 Jun 1999, London Underground Limited v Noel: CA 29 Jun 1999, Shanley v Mersey Docks and Harbour Company General Vargos Shipping Inc: CA 28 Jun 1999, Warsame and Warsame v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 25 Jun 1999, Millington v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and Regions v Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council: CA 25 Jun 1999, Chilton v Surrey County Council and Foakes (T/A R F Mechanical Services): CA 24 Jun 1999, Oliver v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 23 Jun 1999, Regina v Her Majestys Coroner for Northumberland ex parte Jacobs: CA 22 Jun 1999, Sheriff v Klyne Tugs (Lowestoft) Ltd: CA 24 Jun 1999, Starke and another (Executors of Brown decd) v Inland Revenue Commissioners: CA 23 May 1995, South and District Finance Plc v Barnes Etc: CA 15 May 1995, Gan Insurance Company Limited and Another v Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited: CA 28 May 1999, Thorn EMI Plc v Customs and Excise Commissioners: CA 5 Jun 1995, London Borough of Bromley v Morritt: CA 21 Jun 1999, Kuwait Oil Tanker Company Sak; Sitka Shipping Incorporated v Al Bader;Qabazard; Stafford and H Clarkson and Company Limited; Mccoy; Kuwait Petroleum Corporation and Others: CA 28 May 1999, Worby, Worby and Worby v Rosser: CA 28 May 1999, Bajwa v British Airways plc; Whitehouse v Smith; Wilson v Mid Glamorgan Council and Sheppard: CA 28 May 1999. Sometime before completion the Bank learned that National Westminster Plc was proposing to take a second charge over the new lease. Next Next post: Dunbar Bank Plc v Nadeem and Another: ChD 13 Nov 1996. Judges: Millett LJ Citations: Consequently, the wife was precluded from suing the solicitor for negligence, being her last chance of compensation. [1997] 1 All ER 144. In my judgment it is not necessary to reach a conclusion on this question, since I am satisfied that the Judge was wrong to take the Legal Charge at face value. In the view of the bank and its solicitor it was unnecessary for her to have independent advice. This purported to make each of the mortgagors jointly and severally liable for all moneys and liabilities owed by either of them on any account. It is unclear when the Bank first learned of the amount of Mr Nadeem's indebtedness to National Westminster Bank Plc. Dunbar Bank plc v Nadeem [1998] husband, H, and the wife, W, signed a joint loan facility with DB for the purchase of a lease in their joint names; transaction was not manifestly disadvantageous to W because she had obtained a beneficial joint interest in the equity of redemption, and proof of manifest disadvantage was essential in the case of . Moreover, the Judge did to my mind find more than a relationship in which Mrs Nadeem was content to leave it to Mr Nadeem to make decisions in financial matters because she trusted him. Before making any decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate. It is impossible, in my judgment, to. VERIFIED Plus. The Judge found that the transaction was manifestly disadvantageous to Mrs Nadeem because of the presence of two features. National Commercial Bank (Jamaica) Ltd. v Hew [2003] UKPC 51, holding (at [91]) that there was a need for unconscionable conduct, abuse of influence and unfair exploitation of the influence over the vulnerable party. Held (1) The general principle was that a person who had been induced to enter into a transaction by the undue influence of another ("the wrongdoer") was entitled to set that transaction as against the wrongdoer. 2023 vLex Justis Limited All rights reserved, VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. Dunbar Bank Plc v Nadeem & Anor England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Jun 18, 1998; Subsequent References; CaseIQ TM (AI Recommendations) Dunbar Bank Plc v Nadeem & Anor [1998] 2 FLR 457 [1998] 3 FCR 629 (1999) 31 HLR 402 [1998] Fam Law 595 [1998] 3 All ER 876 [1998] EWCA Civ 1027. However, this is not to say that the present case is, in terms of either its facts or the issues to be decided, on all fours with previously decided cases. This purported to make each of the mortgagors jointly and severally liable for all moneys and liabilities owed by either of them on any account. v. Buckleton [1912] UKHL 642 (11 November 1912), Society of Solicitors, Edinburgh v Mathew Smillie and Others, Atari Corp (UK) Ltd v Electronics Boutique Stores (UK) [1997] EWCA Civ 2099 (15th July, 1997). I would set aside the Judges order and substitute an order dismissing the counterclaim and giving an order for possession to the Bank. Dunbar Bank Plc v Nadeem [1998] Mortgage loan taken out partly to pay off H's debts and partly to buy a longer lease of H and W's home in replacement of the existing lease under which H and W were to be joint tenants. Search over 120 million documents from over 100 countries including primary and secondary collections of legislation, case law, regulations, practical law, news, forms and contracts, books, journals, and more. The bank had instructed a solicitor to act for it. In the circumstances the charge would be set aside as against the wife if she paid to the bank one half of the 210,000 loaned for the lease plus interest. Mr Cherryman objected that no such case was pleaded. The facility letter is dated 28th February 1991. Disclaimer: This essay has been written by a law student and not by our expert law writers. 1 Cites [ Bailii] Bank of Cyprus (London) Ltd v Alexander [1998] EWCA Civ 1067 23 Jun 1998 CA Banking [ Bailii] Dunbar Bank Plc v Maurice Nadeem Zubaida Nadeem and Another Times, 01 July 1998; [1998] EWCA Civ 1027; [1998] 3 All ER 876 1 Jul 1998 CA Millett LJ Undue Influence, Banking, Equity Manifest disadvantage had to be shown in order to . Mr Nadeem was a solicitor in sole practice. The Judge found: "Although Mrs Nadeem did sign the letter, I have no doubt having heard and observed her giving evidence before me that she merely signed because her husband asked her to do so. At most, she would have understood that the document was something to do with the house.". In particular, the transaction with which I am concerned cannot be neatly categorized as a pure surety case such as O'Brien or as an ordinary case of joint borrowing for joint purposes as in Pitt. D8; Times, July 1, 1998 65-3, May 2002. Subscribers are able to see a visualisation of a case and its relationships to other cases. I refer to the passage in the judgment of Millett LJ in Dunbar Bank Plc v Nadeem, a case of material non-disclosure, the court ought nevertheless to refuse rescission. Continue with Recommended Cookies. The Bank was at all times anxious to be repaid its 260,000 out of the proceeds of a sale or re-mortgage of the property and evinced a willingness to discharge its security upon having repayment of that sum with interest. Law 595; (1999) 77 P. & C.R. also agree with the analysis by Lord Justice Morritt of what, in reality, constituted the transaction to be set aside in this action for the purposes of deciding what right or advantage the Wife was bound to restore as a condition of setting aside the charge. Even if the Legal Charge were set aside, she would be unable to assert any beneficial interest in the property in priority to the Banks Legal Charge. Despite such unprofessional conduct, even in-light of his misrepresentation, the husbands testimony was preferred to that of the wife. 2023 vLex Justis Limited All rights reserved, VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. Edited by: The Rt Hon Sir Mathew Thorpe Publisher: Bloomsbury Professional. Mr Nadeem had also borrowed heavily from other sources, and he was indebted to other banks including National Westminster Bank. 876: the Court of Appea took an unconscionability-based approach (the second approach) that the meaning of undue is about the way in which the party uses their influence; Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (no.2) [2001] UKHL 44 is the leading case on undue influence from the House of Lords prepared to accept repayment out of the proceeds of a re-mortgage, and it must have been prepared to accept the discharge of its own security to allow a re-mortgage (not, it should be noted, namely a second mortgage) to be effected. The explanation which Mr Nadeem gave in evidence was that he thought that his wife should have an interest in the property as he himself was "getting on". This is the judgment of the court, to which all its members have contributed, on an appeal by Mrs. Doris Aboody from part of a judgment of Sir Joseph Cantley (sitting as an additional judge of the High Court), given on 30th September 1987.