CIBC Mortgages v Pitt 
- A wife was pressured by her husband into signing a mortgage of £150,000 to fund his stocks and shares trading
- The loan was said to be for the purchase of a holiday home
- Initially, the husband became a millionnaire on paper, though he never chased in his shares, instead buying more.
- In 1987, with the stock market crash, the husband lost everything and the bank sought to repossess the house
- Could the wife buy alprazolam online uk claim undue influence?
- Yes, no repossession
- Manifest disadvantage does not apply in the case of actual undue influence, it only applies in presumed undue influence cases
- As such, the bank not being put on notice was irrelevant to the outcome
- A mortgagee is entitled to take a mortgage agreement at face face value in deciding whether presumed undue influence may exist
Posted in Contract Law Revision Notes.
This page was last updated on 28th April 2015