Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2

"Fairclough v Swan Brewery Co Ltd" [1912] AC 565 is a significant case in English contract and

property law, particularly concerning the doctrine of equity in relation to mortgages and the right
of redemption.

### Key Points:


1. **Facts**: Fairclough leased a hotel property to Swan Brewery with a mortgage agreement
that included a term preventing Fairclough from redeeming the property until six weeks before
the expiration of the 20-year lease.
2. **Issue**: The primary issue was whether this term, which significantly delayed Fairclough's
right to redeem the property, constituted an unreasonable restraint on the right to redemption.
3. **Decision**: The Privy Council held that the clause postponing the right to redeem until six
weeks before the end of the 20-year term was void. The court found that the term effectively
nullified the mortgagor's equitable right to redeem.

### Legal Principles:


- **Equity of Redemption**: This principle ensures that a borrower has the right to reclaim their
property once the debt secured by the mortgage is repaid.
- **Clog or Fetter on Redemption**: Equity does not permit any term in a mortgage that would
obstruct or unduly restrict the borrower's right to redeem the property. The decision emphasized
that any term effectively denying the right of redemption is invalid.
- **Reasonableness of Redemption Terms**: The decision underlined that terms significantly
delaying or complicating redemption, especially near the end of a lease term, could be
considered unreasonable and thus void.

### Impact:
"Fairclough v Swan Brewery Co Ltd" is a landmark case that underscores the importance of the
equitable right to redemption in mortgage agreements. It establishes that any provision that
unduly restricts or makes the right of redemption illusory will not be upheld by the courts. This
case is frequently cited in mortgage law to emphasize the principle that a mortgage should not
contain terms that prevent a borrower from redeeming their property under reasonable
conditions.
This case reinforces the protection provided by equity to borrowers, ensuring that they have a
genuine opportunity to reclaim their property once the secured debt is paid.

You might also like