Bradley v Carritt [1903] AC 253

Court: House of Lords

Basic Facts: M mortgaged shares to secure a loan, agreeing that L would always have the brokerage for the company's tea sales. After the mortgage was paid off, the company changed brokers, and L claimed a commission.

Issue for the Court: Can a continuing obligation after a mortgage be considered a clog or fetter on redemption?

Held: The Privy Council held that a tenant's covenant not to assign without consent could be enforced by specific performance, but the landlord’s refusal of consent must be reasonable.

Lord Macnaghten & Lord Lindley

• No Continuing Obligation Post-Redemption:

• Once a debt is repaid, any obligations tied to the mortgage cease, and the property reverts to the mortgagor free of encumbrances.

• A collateral benefit, such as future brokerage rights, is separate from the mortgage and does not affect the right of redemption.

• No Clog or Fetter:

• The agreement for continued brokerage was independent of the mortgage and did not interfere with the ability to redeem.