Starling v Lloyds Bank

Series: New Property Cases ; [1999] NPC 129 (3)Publication details: 1999Subject(s):

Summary: CA 29 October 1999. In the absence of a contractual obligation or bad faith a lender owes a boroower no duty of care when considering an application for consent to let mortgaged property. HEADNOTE FROM JOURNAL - NO PHOTOCOPYING ALLOWED

Holdings ( 1 )
Title notes ( 1 )

Holdings
Item type	Current library	Call number	Copy number	Status	Barcode
Law report	London Journal article	X102983 (Browse shelf(Opens below))	1	Available	102983-1001

Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)

Previous	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	No cover image available	Next
Previous	X102980 Fitzpatrick v Sterling	X102981 Lambeth LBC v Rogers	X102982 Inntrepreneur v Hollard	X102983 Starling v Lloyds Bank	X103 Commercial property - financing its future	X1030 Unicorn Inns plc v SoS Environment and Chelmsford BC	X103027 Appeal by stated case	Next

CA 29 October 1999. In the absence of a contractual obligation or bad faith a lender owes a boroower no duty of care when considering an application for consent to let mortgaged property. HEADNOTE FROM JOURNAL - NO PHOTOCOPYING ALLOWED

Print
Cite
Send to device
Save record
BIBTEX Dublin Core MARCXML MARC (non-Unicode/MARC-8) MARC (Unicode/UTF-8) MARC (Unicode/UTF-8, Standard) MODS (XML) RIS ISBD
More searches

Search for this title in:
Other Libraries (WorldCat) Other Databases (Google Scholar) Open Library (openlibrary.org)