← All Authorities
United Kingdom clog on equity of redemptioncharacterisation

Brighton & Hove City Council v Audus

[2009] EWHC 340 (Ch)
JurisdictionUnited Kingdom
CourtHigh Court of Justice, Chancery Division
Year2009
StatusPersuasive authority

Key Principle

In deciding whether a provision is an impermissible clog on the equity of redemption, the court looks at the overall character and substance of the composite transaction (including written and oral terms); the doctrine against clogs applies only where the substance of the transaction is genuinely a mortgage, and not where it is something more complex such as a purchase subject to life occupation.

Area of Law

General

Related Cases

TNLC & Anor v Gambling Commission & Ors [2026] EWHC 891 (TCC)
Aabar Holdings S.A.R.L. and others v Glencore Plc and others [2026] EWHC 877 (Comm)
Waterside Class Limited v Mowi ASA & Ors [2026] CAT 32

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Brighton & Hove City Council v Audus and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Brighton & Hove City Council v...