- Published on
Land Law - Equitable mortgages
A mortgage that does not give the mortgagee a legal claim to the mortgagor's land is known as an equitable mortgage. These typically occur in two circumstances.
where the mortgagor's only ownership interest in the land is equitable
This would include assigning the equitable interest to the mortgagee rather than a formal deed. This could happen, for instance, if someone does not actually own the land; instead, they have a life interest in the property through a trust deed.
where there is a defective legal mortgage
This can occur in a variety of circumstances, but it typically occurs when one of the mortgagors has committed forgery or when an attempt has been made to give a formal, legal mortgage but it has failed due to a deed that is faulty or a failure to register with HM Land Registry.
Important phrase: Equitable interest
Equitable interest, as opposed to strict legal ownership and being listed on the title deeds, is a form of ownership or legal interest in land that results from certain actions, or inactions, of a person, or as a result of fairness and justice.
A mortgage that does not give the mortgagee a legal claim to the mortgagor's land is known as an equitable mortgage. These typically occur in two circumstances.
where the mortgagor's only ownership interest in the land is equitable
This would include assigning the equitable interest to the mortgagee rather than a formal deed. This could happen, for instance, if someone does not actually own the land; instead, they have a life interest in the property through a trust deed.
where there is a defective legal mortgage
This can occur in a variety of circumstances, but it typically occurs when one of the mortgagors has committed forgery or when an attempt has been made to give a formal, legal mortgage but it has failed due to a deed that is faulty or a failure to register with HM Land Registry.
Important phrase: Equitable interest
Equitable interest, as opposed to strict legal ownership and being listed on the title deeds, is a form of ownership or legal interest in land that results from certain actions, or inactions, of a person, or as a result of fairness and justice.
- Published on
Land Law - Rights and remedies of the mortgagor
The act of a mortgagor creating a debt secured on their land or property occurs when they grant a mortgage to a lender. The mortgagee may file a lawsuit to recoup the debt owing to them in the event that the mortgagor defaults on this obligation.
Over time, a mortgagor's rights have undergone substantial alteration. Before 1925, a mortgagor's rights were severely limited, and common law provisions typically did not favor a mortgagor when granting a mortgage. If a mortgage was necessary, the mortgagor would give the mortgagee complete ownership of the land or property, and the mortgagee would be regarded as the property's legitimate owner. Very different from now, when the mortgagee is listed on the title deeds as having a legal charge or interest over the property and the mortgagor retains legal ownership.
The Law of Property Act of 1925 was introduced with the intention of defining two methods—lease or legal charge—for establishing a valid mortgage.
(deed) and from this arose the ‘equity of redemption’ which covers a bundle of rights that the mortgagor will enjoy pending full repayment of the debt.
This involved adding two dates to a mortgage's lifecycle. The first, known as the legal date of redemption, was typically set six months following the mortgage's inception. The second date is the mortgage's expiration. The equitable right to redeem is the period of time between the first and second date.
Important phrase: equal right of redemption
This is the mortgagor's option to pay back the loan in full whenever they choose following the official redemption date. By doing this, the common law laws of the period meant that mortgagors would forfeit all rights to their property if they failed to repay the obligation by the due date. This was intended to avoid problems that had previously arisen for them. This enables the mortgagor the option to repay the mortgage at any time throughout the equitable right to redeem period, should they so choose, and also prohibits mortgagees from requesting a power of sale until after the legal deadline of redemption has passed.
The creation of a contractual connection—that is, an agreement between the parties rather than a one-sided enforcement of terms by the mortgagee—was the primary advantage of the modifications to the mortgagor/mortgagee relationship. The goal of the law is to safeguard the mortgagor's rights and give them the freedom to enjoy their land or other property without the mortgagee interfering. The mortgagee's legal interest can then be eliminated from the title deeds upon full repayment of the loan, commonly referred to as redemption, and the agreement terminates in the same manner as any other obligation.
Important phrase: redemption
This is the procedure through which the mortgagor settles any unpaid sum owed to the mortgagee. According to the terms of the mortgage, this is either paid off at the end of the term, or it may be paid off sooner if the mortgagor decides to sell the home. After then, it would be "redeemed" using the sale proceeds.
The act of a mortgagor creating a debt secured on their land or property occurs when they grant a mortgage to a lender. The mortgagee may file a lawsuit to recoup the debt owing to them in the event that the mortgagor defaults on this obligation.
Over time, a mortgagor's rights have undergone substantial alteration. Before 1925, a mortgagor's rights were severely limited, and common law provisions typically did not favor a mortgagor when granting a mortgage. If a mortgage was necessary, the mortgagor would give the mortgagee complete ownership of the land or property, and the mortgagee would be regarded as the property's legitimate owner. Very different from now, when the mortgagee is listed on the title deeds as having a legal charge or interest over the property and the mortgagor retains legal ownership.
The Law of Property Act of 1925 was introduced with the intention of defining two methods—lease or legal charge—for establishing a valid mortgage.
(deed) and from this arose the ‘equity of redemption’ which covers a bundle of rights that the mortgagor will enjoy pending full repayment of the debt.
This involved adding two dates to a mortgage's lifecycle. The first, known as the legal date of redemption, was typically set six months following the mortgage's inception. The second date is the mortgage's expiration. The equitable right to redeem is the period of time between the first and second date.
Important phrase: equal right of redemption
This is the mortgagor's option to pay back the loan in full whenever they choose following the official redemption date. By doing this, the common law laws of the period meant that mortgagors would forfeit all rights to their property if they failed to repay the obligation by the due date. This was intended to avoid problems that had previously arisen for them. This enables the mortgagor the option to repay the mortgage at any time throughout the equitable right to redeem period, should they so choose, and also prohibits mortgagees from requesting a power of sale until after the legal deadline of redemption has passed.
The creation of a contractual connection—that is, an agreement between the parties rather than a one-sided enforcement of terms by the mortgagee—was the primary advantage of the modifications to the mortgagor/mortgagee relationship. The goal of the law is to safeguard the mortgagor's rights and give them the freedom to enjoy their land or other property without the mortgagee interfering. The mortgagee's legal interest can then be eliminated from the title deeds upon full repayment of the loan, commonly referred to as redemption, and the agreement terminates in the same manner as any other obligation.
Important phrase: redemption
This is the procedure through which the mortgagor settles any unpaid sum owed to the mortgagee. According to the terms of the mortgage, this is either paid off at the end of the term, or it may be paid off sooner if the mortgagor decides to sell the home. After then, it would be "redeemed" using the sale proceeds.
- Published on
Legal Terms - consolidating statute
A statute that repeals and re-enacts existing statutes relating to a particular subject. Its goal is to summarize their overall impact and make the law's presentation simpler. It is not intended to change the
law unless its lengthy title specifically states that it is a consolidation with revisions. The Trade Union and Labor Relations (Consolidation) Act of 1992 is an illustration of a consolidating act.
A statute that repeals and re-enacts existing statutes relating to a particular subject. Its goal is to summarize their overall impact and make the law's presentation simpler. It is not intended to change the
law unless its lengthy title specifically states that it is a consolidation with revisions. The Trade Union and Labor Relations (Consolidation) Act of 1992 is an illustration of a consolidating act.
- Published on
Legal Terms - consolidation of actions
In civil proceedings, a procedure by which two or more cases may be amalgamated. It is generally necessary to show that some common question of law or fact will arise in all the cases. The purpose of consolidation is to save costs and time. The power to consolidate proceedings is an aspect of the court’s general powers of management as set out in Part 3 of the *Civil Procedure Rules.
In civil proceedings, a procedure by which two or more cases may be amalgamated. It is generally necessary to show that some common question of law or fact will arise in all the cases. The purpose of consolidation is to save costs and time. The power to consolidate proceedings is an aspect of the court’s general powers of management as set out in Part 3 of the *Civil Procedure Rules.
- Published on
Legal Terms - consolidation of mortgages
The right of a mortgagee who has taken mortgages on two or more properties from the same mortgagor to require the mortgagor to redeem all of the mortgages or none, provided that the
contractual date of redemption (see POWER OF SALE) for all of them has passed. The right arose because it was considered unfair to a mortgagee to have one security redeemed when another, given by the same mortgagor, might be inadequate to secure that loan. Since 1881 at least one of the mortgage deeds must show an intent to allow consolidation for the
mortgagee to exercise the right.
The right of a mortgagee who has taken mortgages on two or more properties from the same mortgagor to require the mortgagor to redeem all of the mortgages or none, provided that the
contractual date of redemption (see POWER OF SALE) for all of them has passed. The right arose because it was considered unfair to a mortgagee to have one security redeemed when another, given by the same mortgagor, might be inadequate to secure that loan. Since 1881 at least one of the mortgage deeds must show an intent to allow consolidation for the
mortgagee to exercise the right.
- Published on
Legal Terms - conspiracy n. 1. An agreement between two or more people to behave in a manner that will automatically constitute an offence by at least one of them (e.g. two people agree that one of them shall steal while the other waits in a getaway car). Even if the agreement is not followed out, it is still a statutory crime (Criminal Law Act 1977, \ 1) and is typically punished in the same manner as the agreed-upon offense. Even if the crime agreed upon is one of *strict responsibility, at least two of the conspirators must have mens rea, or knowledge of the facts that make the action unlawful. Even though it is impossible to carry out the agreed-upon offense, one may nevertheless be guilty of conspiracy (for instance, where two or more people
plan to steal money from a safe without realizing that it is empty (see also R v. Shivpuri [1986] 2 All ER 334). However, if a person's spouse or civil partner is the sole other participant to the arrangement, they are not guilty of conspiracy. It is no longer illegal to encourage or attempt conspiracies.
Common law still recognizes certain types of criminal conspiracy. These now consist of three things: (1) conspiracies to *defraud (i.e., to steal, commit fraud, obtain property by deception, or violate a copyright); (2) conspiracies to corrupt public; and (3) conspiracies to outrage public decency (this could involve an arrangement to present an offensive exhibition). 2. When two or more individuals work together to harm a third person, it is considered a tort. Protection of one's own financial or commercial interests cannot be the primary goal of a lawful means conspiracy; rather, the intention to harm must be the main goal. A conspiracy involving "unlawful means" must have the common goal of harming a third party. This definition of "unlawful" encompasses both criminal activity and civil law violations (Total Network SL v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2008] UKHL 19, [2008] 2 WLR 711).
plan to steal money from a safe without realizing that it is empty (see also R v. Shivpuri [1986] 2 All ER 334). However, if a person's spouse or civil partner is the sole other participant to the arrangement, they are not guilty of conspiracy. It is no longer illegal to encourage or attempt conspiracies.
Common law still recognizes certain types of criminal conspiracy. These now consist of three things: (1) conspiracies to *defraud (i.e., to steal, commit fraud, obtain property by deception, or violate a copyright); (2) conspiracies to corrupt public; and (3) conspiracies to outrage public decency (this could involve an arrangement to present an offensive exhibition). 2. When two or more individuals work together to harm a third person, it is considered a tort. Protection of one's own financial or commercial interests cannot be the primary goal of a lawful means conspiracy; rather, the intention to harm must be the main goal. A conspiracy involving "unlawful means" must have the common goal of harming a third party. This definition of "unlawful" encompasses both criminal activity and civil law violations (Total Network SL v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2008] UKHL 19, [2008] 2 WLR 711).
- Published on
Legal Terms - Constituency: A region of the United Kingdom where a representative is chosen to serve in the *House of Commons or another devolved body.
- Published on
Legal Terms -Constituency Members
Members of the *London Assembly each of whom represents one of the 14 London constituencies. Every four years, London voters elect *London Members and the *Mayor of London at the same time as constituency members. The fourteen constituencies in London yield one member each.
Members of the *London Assembly each of whom represents one of the 14 London constituencies. Every four years, London voters elect *London Members and the *Mayor of London at the same time as constituency members. The fourteen constituencies in London yield one member each.
- Published on
Legal Terms -constitution
the set of laws and customs that establish the makeup, duties, and powers of a state's local and federal government institutions as well as the parameters of the citizen-state relationship. most states
have a written constitution, one of the fundamental provisions of which is that it can itself be amended only in accordance with a special procedure. The United Kingdom's constitution is primarily oral. It is made up in part of statutes, which can be amended by later acts without the need for a particular procedure, but it also comprises, in large part, of common law regulations and constitutional conventions.
the set of laws and customs that establish the makeup, duties, and powers of a state's local and federal government institutions as well as the parameters of the citizen-state relationship. most states
have a written constitution, one of the fundamental provisions of which is that it can itself be amended only in accordance with a special procedure. The United Kingdom's constitution is primarily oral. It is made up in part of statutes, which can be amended by later acts without the need for a particular procedure, but it also comprises, in large part, of common law regulations and constitutional conventions.
- Published on
Legal Terms -constitutional conventions
customs that are not legally binding but are widely observed as if they are that pertain to the Crown, the government, Parliament, and the courts carrying out their official duties. One of the most crucial is that the Crown can only utilize its constitutional authority in compliance with the recommendations of ministers who have the backing of a majority of members of the House of Commons. The reasons behind the observance of conventions are multifaceted. For instance, calling a meeting of Parliament at least once a year is a very old custom. Should that not occur, there wouldn't be a yearly Finance Act, and the government's only means of funding would be by increasing unlawful taxes. On the other hand, illicit activity would not necessarily ensue if the Crown disregarded the custom that a law lawfully approved by Parliament cannot be refused the royal assent (albeit the monarchy itself might be in jeopardy). The main goal of adhering to conventions is to guarantee the seamless operation of the governmental apparatus; as conventions are not enshrined in legislation, they can be legally altered to accommodate evolving situations. Case: AG (1976) QB 752 (Spycatcher case) v. Jonathan Cape Ltd.
customs that are not legally binding but are widely observed as if they are that pertain to the Crown, the government, Parliament, and the courts carrying out their official duties. One of the most crucial is that the Crown can only utilize its constitutional authority in compliance with the recommendations of ministers who have the backing of a majority of members of the House of Commons. The reasons behind the observance of conventions are multifaceted. For instance, calling a meeting of Parliament at least once a year is a very old custom. Should that not occur, there wouldn't be a yearly Finance Act, and the government's only means of funding would be by increasing unlawful taxes. On the other hand, illicit activity would not necessarily ensue if the Crown disregarded the custom that a law lawfully approved by Parliament cannot be refused the royal assent (albeit the monarchy itself might be in jeopardy). The main goal of adhering to conventions is to guarantee the seamless operation of the governmental apparatus; as conventions are not enshrined in legislation, they can be legally altered to accommodate evolving situations. Case: AG (1976) QB 752 (Spycatcher case) v. Jonathan Cape Ltd.
