Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
26 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
National Westminster Bank v Morgan |
Lord Scarman stated that there was "no precisely defined law setting limits" - unconscionability depends upon the particular facts of the case. Transaction should be "manifestly disadvantageous" |
|
Darby v Shanley |
Solicitor liable in negligence for failing to carry through a transaction of gift so as to protect the recipient from an undue influence action |
|
Bourke v O'Donnell |
Bank was made jointly liable on the basis of a breach of a contractual duty not to carry through a transaction when it knows of, or has reasonable grounds to suspect, a lack of capacity |
|
Mutual Finance Ltd v John Wetton & Sons Ltd |
Brother pressurised into giving a guarantee to avoid prosecution of his brother and disclosure of the matter to their ill father |
|
Ó'Siodhachain v O'Mahony |
Couple "infiltrated" lives of another couple and persuaded them to sign an unfavourable contract - instilled fear in them of consequences of refusal, advised against legal advice, misrepresented legal force - actual undue influence |
|
Bank of Montreal v Stuart |
Presumption of undue influence does not arise automatically in husband/wife situation |
|
Prendergast v Joyce |
De facto relationship of influence based on particular facts: nephew and aunt. Aunt was suffering dementia and in a state of shock following husband's death. Age, state of health and shocked state after husband's funeral meant that transaction was improvident. No independent advice. No requirement of "moral turpitude" on part of stronger party |
|
Re Brocklehurst |
Spontaneous and independent act on the part of an eccentric baronet to gift extensive shooting rights to a friend was not a result of undue influence |
|
Carroll v Carroll |
Although solicitor advised father of transfer, this was not adequate because it was not fully independent or fully informed of circumstances of case. Need to show "substantial benefit obtained." Not a question of wrongdoing or impropriety - must simply be assiduous not to take advantage of position Transaction was improvident because father would have been left at mercy of daughter–in–law |
|
Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No.2) |
Effect of independent advice depends on circumstances of each case. Was transaction explicable only on the basis of undue influence? Broader principle that lender would be put on notice with all non-commercial guarantees. Lenders could rely on certificate of a solicitor. |
|
CIBC v Pitt |
Unnecessary to show manifest disadvantage in relation to actual undue influence |
|
Hammond v Osborn |
Neighbour refused gift from old man but eventually agreed - because it represented 90% of his assets and he would not have been able to meet tax liability, gift had to be set aside despite no wrongful behaviour on her part |
|
Allcard v Skinner |
Woman made gift to nuns without access to legal advice - gift could have been set aside but delay was too long |
|
Cheese v Thomas |
Blameworthiness may be relevant in respect of remedies - presumption of undue influence between old man and nephew - loss divided between both parties |
|
Bridgman v Greene |
Footman obtained benefits for his friends from his master - all transactions were tainted with undue influence |
|
Gregg v Kidd |
Sister induced brother to make a transfer benefiting her son |
|
Barclays Bank v O'Brien |
On the basis of misrepresentation, wife guaranteed husband's business debts - transaction set aside by Lord Browne-Wilkinson for actual/constructive notice. Creditor was put on inquiry where there was i) no financial advantage for wife ii) substantial risk and failed to take reasonable steps - independent advice and private meeting |
|
Ulster Bank v Fitzgerald |
O'Donovan J ruled that even if there was undue influence, this did not effect bank because it did not have actual or constructive notice - written warning was sufficient |
|
Danske Bank AS v Walsh |
Unless there are special circumstances, a bank is not usually put on inquiry in relation to commercial transactions between business people. Written warning satisfactory. |
|
Ulster Bank of Ireland v Roche |
Unmarried partner in an abusive relationship guaranteed partner's debts. Clarke J approved of general principles in Etridge - bank placed on inquiry where aware of non-commercial element (ie. no direct interest in company, position as co-habitant). Did not accept full reasonable steps in Etridge, but no steps at all had been taken in the case. |
|
Tynan v County Registrar for Kilkenny |
Daughter gave mortgage over house, mother agreed to postpone her right of residence. Mother alleged she had not received sufficient independent legal advice but court ruled bank was entitled to rely of solicitor's certificate |
|
Garcia v National Australian Bank |
Australian court recognised "special equity" in favour of married sureties where wife did not understand transaction and it was not explained |
|
Bank of Ireland v Smyth |
Approval of the "special equity" approach in the High Court in relation to a Family Home Protection Act action |
|
Fry v Lane
|
Purchase made to "poor and ignorant" man at a "considerable undervalue" with "no independent advice"
|
|
Grealish v Murphy
|
"Mentally deficient" farmer entered into an unfavourable contract – independent advice was not adequate or fully informed. Gavan Duffy J identified particular disadvantages entailing protection
|
|
Alec Lobb (Garages) v Total Oil Great Britain
|
English cases require culpability on the defendant's side – weakness must have been exploited in a "morally culpable" manner – "shocks the conscience" of the court
|