This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

GDL Law Notes GDL Land Law Notes

Mortgages Notes

Updated Mortgages Notes

GDL Land Law Notes

GDL Land Law

Approximately 556 pages

A collection of the best GDL notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through applications from top students and carefully evaluating each on accuracy, formatting, logical structure, spelling/grammar, conciseness and "wow-factor". In short these are what we believe to be the strongest set of GDL notes available in the UK this year. This collection of GDL notes is fully updated for recent exams, also making them the most up-to-date GDL study materials ...

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our GDL Land Law Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Land Law: Mortgages

Terminology

  • Mortgagor = borrower

  • Mortgagee = lender (mortgagee; building society).

  • So householder grants mortgage to bank.

Definition

  • Santley v Wilde:

    • mortgage = ‘a conveyance of land ... as security for the payment of a debt or the discharge of some other obligation’.

  • More modern definition: a proprietary interest in land, granted by mortgagor to mortgagee, as security for a loan of cash.

  • Charge by way of legal mortgage: ss85/87 LPA 1925.

Formalities for legal mortgage

  • Mortgages is capable of being a legal interest listed in s1(2)(c) LPA 1925.

  • Formalities:

    • deed (s52 LPA s1 LPMPA)

    • + if registered land, substantively register (s27(2)(f) LRA 2002, registrable disposition) [+ S48 LRA].

    • + if unregistered land,

      • If first legal mortgage, mortgagee takes title deeds as security, that is sufficient notice to subsequent purchasers/mortgagees.

      • if legal mortgage not protected by deposit (puisne mortgage), registered at Land Charges Registry, LCA 1972, a c(i) Charge (s2(4)(i) [[the only legal interest that can be registered at Plymouth Land Charges Registry]]. if not registered as a land charge s4(5) LCA: void against a purchaser of the land or any interest in such land.

Equitable mortgages

  • Can arise in 3 ways:

    • (1) Mortgage of a legal interest not done by valid deed

    • (2) a contract to grant a legal mortgage, where there is subsequently no valid grant

    • (3) a mortgage of an equitable interest

  • (1) Equitable mortgage of a legal estate (mortgagor has legal estate)

    • (most commonly a failed legal mortgage; or deliberate contract to grant a legal mortgage). NO valid deed.

    • Then instead you need an agreement to create a mortgage, an estate contract.

    • Formalities, need s2 LPMPA: in writing; all terms; signed by both parties.

    • De Serville v Argee: exchange of letters will not satisfy s2.

    • No longer possible to create an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds alone; United Bank of Kuwait v Sahib: deposit of title deeds is not a means of creating an equitable mortgage; but a mortgage given effect in equity because deemed to be a contract to create a legal mortgage.

  • (2) Mortgages of equitable interests (mortgage has equitable interest)

    • borrower only has equitable interest, can only grant an equitable mortgage.

    • Disposition of an equitable interest--S53(1)(c) LPA 1925: minimum requirement: in writing; signed by person disposing (mortgagor).

    • In practice, such a mortgage may be preceded by a contract, an agreement to enter into the mortgage, s2 LPMPA: a contract for disposition of an interest in land.

  • Enforcement/protection of equitable mortgages:

    • Registered land: can protect by registration of a notice on charges register: s32 Notice LRA 2002/s29(1) if registered, binding on purchaser for valuable consideration.

      • NB, equitable mortgage not overriding interest.

    • Unregistered: c(iii) Land Charge, LCA 1972 (s2(4)(iii).

      • if not registered as a land charge s4(5) LCA: void against a purchaser of the land or any interest in such land.

Rights of mortgagor (borrower), equity of redemption

  • NB: discussing these issues, maybe always start with Kreglinger v New Patagonia: must be ‘no clog/fetter’ on the ‘equity of redemption’—once a mortgage, always.

  • (1) Equitable right to redeem/Continuing right to redeem

    • Kreglinger v New Patagonia: once a mortgage, always a mortgage.

    • Must be ‘no clog or fetter’ on the ‘equity of redemption

  • (2) Postponement of redemption

    • Cannot prevent redemption (Toomes v Conset)

    • But might lender might be able to postpone if doesn’t render the right to redeem illusory

    • Valid postponement, Knightsbridge Estates v Byrne (commercial; freehold): court upheld validity of mortgage term postponing redemption for 40 years from date of loan

      • Factors:

      • (1) Was arm’s length commercial transaction

      • (2) mortgage of freehold property, so at end of 40 years borrower gets back what they mortgaged in first place.

      • Other factors: favourable rate of interest; existence of legal advice; lack of unconscionable behaviour.

    • This was commercial, If domestic, might be different.

    • CF, not valid postponement, Fairclough v Swan Brewery (leasehold; redemption would be valueless) cannot postpone redemption to extent that the borrower’s right to redeem is rendered illusory: struck down clause of redemption, re could not redeem until 6 weeks before end of lease (had 17.5 years left to run).

      • Factors:

      • Because it’s a leasehold: by 6 weeks before end of lease, borrower gets back very minimal value you get back something with much less value than what you mortgaged in first place.

  • (3) Options to purchase

    • Options: allowing option would be a ‘clog on the equity of redemption’; if mortgagee could simply exercise the option, would be able to prevent mortgagor ever resuming their interest.

    • [[remember: for option contract to be valid: need s2 LPMPA requirements]].

    • Void granted at time of mortgage, Samuel v Jarrah Timber.

    • Valid granted after mortgage in a separate/independent transaction, Reeve v Lisle.

      • Granted 12 days later; mortgage not dependent on grant of the option.

    • Composition transaction, mortgage & option part of larger transaction look at substance of overall character (Warnborough v Garmite).

      • Depends if the transaction as a whole is a mortgage, with option attached (so invalid); of if overall substance of transaction is not a mortgage, so equitable principals of mortgage don’t govern, option can be valid.

      • Valid overall ‘substance’ of transaction not a mortgage, Warnborough v Garmite: option was part of sale & purchase agreement, not part of mortgage. Even though same day.

      • Brighton & Hove CC v Audus: court can say the transaction as whole is not a mortgage (even if mortgage involved). Look at substance, not its label.

      • Void, option part of mortgage Jones v Morgan, void option (for 50% of property), even though granted 3 years later, because was treated as a variation of the original mortgage and so part of it; so clog on equity.

  • (4) Collateral...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our GDL Land Law Notes.

More GDL Land Law Samples