header-logo header-logo

05 February 2020 / Cecily Crampin , Tricia Hemans
Issue: 7873 / Categories: Features , Property
printer mail-detail

Where are we now?

15325
Mortgage receivership & possession: so few answers, many more questions. Cecily Crampin & Tricia Hemans report
  • Mortgage receivership and possession claims, considering the current state of the law following the decision in Menon v Pask and the practical effect of the decision in terms of the utility of receivership, how far the principles in Menon might extend, and the courts’ approach to receivership questions.

It’s easy to feel that cases involving mortgage receivership require belief in as many as six impossible things before breakfast. The deemed agency makes the receiver the borrower’s apparent servant, and yet his actions are out of the borrower’s control. This wonderland is particularly apparent when a receiver seeks possession from the borrower since it appears as if the borrower is suing himself for possession of a property, which he the borrower, has a right to possess.

Last autumn’s decision of Mr Justice Mann in Menon v Pask [2019] EWHC 2611 (Ch), [2019] All ER (D) 79 (Oct) has answered at least one

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll