## Facts

- Mr. Shaire and Mrs. Shaire jointly owned a property.
- Mrs. Shaire forged Mr. Shaire’s signature to obtain a mortgage from the Mortgage Corporation.
- After the parties defaulted on mortgage payments, the Mortgage Corporation sought a sale order under section 14 of the Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TOLATA).
- Mr. Shaire objected to the sale, arguing that his ownership rights should not be affected by the actions of Mrs. Shaire.

## Issues

1. Whether courts should grant a sale order for jointly owned property under TOLATA when a co-owner has defaulted, particularly where the mortgage was obtained by forgery.
2. Whether the prior approach of automatically favoring lenders in sale applications should remain the standard following TOLATA.
3. How courts should balance the interests of all parties, including non-defaulting co-owners and any children living in the property, when considering the sale of co-owned property.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal overturned the original sale order.
- Lord Justice Neuberger held that TOLATA grants courts broad discretion in these matters and that courts are no longer bound to favor lenders automatically.
- The court emphasized the need to consider all relevant factors, such as the intentions behind the trust, the needs of children or occupants, and the interests of the lender.

## Legal Principles

- Courts possess wide discretion under section 14 of TOLATA and must assess all relevant circumstances, not merely the interests of lenders.
- Prior to this ruling, courts often ordered sales that primarily favored lenders, but this default approach was rejected.
- The rights of non-defaulting co-owners, the needs of occupant children, and the intended use of the property must be weighed alongside lender interests.
- The decision shifted the approach from the automatic sale rules under the Law of Property Act 1925 to a more equitable, case-specific assessment under TOLATA.

## Conclusion

Mortgage Corporation v Shaire [2001] Ch 743 is a landmark property law case that ended the presumption in favor of automatic sale orders for mortgage lenders under TOLATA. Courts must now balance all relevant circumstances in sale applications, promoting fairness for both vulnerable owners and lenders, as confirmed by subsequent case law.