Secured indebtedness, set-off and enforcement: the law after Woodeson v Credit Suisse

It has long been recognised by practitioners in the mortgage field that the existence of a cross-claim for unliquidated damages will not give the borrower a defence to the lender’s claim for possession. This article written by Elizabeth Ovey at Radcliffe Chambers explores the policy underlying that principle and its recent application by the Court of Appeal in Woodeson v Credit Suisse and examines its scope and consequences, particularly in relation to other forms of secured lending, issues of limitation and a possible exception where the cross-claim is based on an allegation of deceit.

Click here to read the full article.

Filed Under: JIBFL

Relevant Articles
Area of Interest