| 000 | 01040cab a2200229 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS56010 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1996 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u20405 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aCredit Lyonnais Bank Nederland NV v Burch | ||
| 260 | _c1996 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aNew Law Journal _v[1996] NLJ 1421-1422(2) |
||
| 520 | _aCA 20 June 1996. A junior employee was unduly influenced by her employer to mortgage her flat in order to increase the businesses overdraft limit. When the company went into liquidation the bank was unable to recoup the total sum and demanded the outstanding sum, £60,000, from the defendant. Appeal by bank dismissed. Held that the transaction was invalid and the bank must have known that no competent solicitor could advise the defendant to enter into such a guarantee as she did. | ||
| 650 | _aCREDIT LYONNAIS V BURCH | ||
| 650 | _aDUTY OF CARE | ||
| 650 | _aMORTGAGES | ||
| 650 | _aUNDUE INFLUENCE | ||
| 690 | _aHOUSING-CASE LAW | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c13670 _d13670 |
||