The appeal concerned the application of the principles laid down in Barclays Bank v O’Brien [1994] 1 AC 180, CIBC Mortgages plc v Pitt [1994] AC 200 and Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) [2002] 2 AC 773 to “hybrid” lending transactions. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that, a lender is put on constructive notice of undue influence by one joint borrower (A) over the other (B), where on the face of the transaction, there is more than a trivial element of the borrowing which is to be used to discharge the debts of A.