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

Hypo-Mortgage Services Ltd v Robinson [1997] 2 FLR 71

Country:
United Kingdom
  • Bs held a property on trust for them and their infant,

  • Plaintiff, and mortgaged out the property and, upon Plaintiff, bank, claiming for possession on grounds that Plaintiff had an overriding interest.

  • CA denied Bs’ claim, stating that children under 18 couldn’t have “actual occupation” as they are only there as “shadows of their parents”.

Nourse LJ

  • Young children cannot consent to the arrangement, and to allow children to “actually occupy” with s.70(1)(g) would be abused as a way of stopping mortgagees from ever repossessing.

    • Seems to move against the idea of “actual occupation” having a literal, not a legal, meaning. 

Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch