When One Person Benefits More: A Supreme Court Warning on Joint Loans

This guidance comes from the Supreme Court decision in Waller-Edwards v One Savings Bank Plc [2025] UKSC 22.

Overview

The Supreme Court has clarified when lenders (such as banks) need to be alert to the risk of undue influence, particularly where a loan is taken out jointly but may not benefit both people equally.

Undue influence simply means being pressured or persuaded into agreeing to something you wouldn’t have agreed to if you were making the decision freely.

Background

Catherine Waller Edwards and her partner, Nicholas Bishop, took out a joint remortgage of £384,000.

Although the loan was in both their names, part of the money was used to pay off Mr Bishop’s personal debts.

After their relationship ended, Ms Waller Edwards argued that she had been pressured into entering the agreement and that the bank should have recognised this risk.

The Key Question

The Supreme Court considered when should a lender realise there is a risk that someone may have been pressured into the agreement and take steps to protect them?

The Supreme Court’s Decision

The Court decided that a lender must take extra care where:

• the loan is not for business purposes; and
• a meaningful part of the money is being used to pay one person’s personal debts.

This is important because, even if the loan looks like a normal joint arrangement, in reality one person may be taking on risk mainly for the benefit of the other.

What This Means in Practice

This decision increases the responsibilities on lenders.

If there are signs that one person is benefiting more than the other, or that the arrangement is not truly equal, then lenders should take steps to protect the potentially vulnerable person.

This will usually include:

• making sure they receive independent legal advice;
• checking they fully understand what they are agreeing to; and
• ensuring the decision is made freely, without pressure.

Why This Matters

This case makes clear that lenders cannot simply rely on a loan being in joint names.

They must look at what is really happening behind the transaction and take action if something doesn’t seem balanced or fair.

How We Can Help

At Wilson Browne, we can help you understand how this decision may affect you, whether you are a lender or a borrower.

We provide:

• clear, practical advice on undue influence;
• independent legal advice on lending arrangements; and
• support to ensure agreements are fair and properly understood.

Get in touch with our Commercial Property team today – or call 0800 088 6004, your first call is free!