Notes on Comparison Between Ghanaian and English Mortgage Law

Introduction

Mortgage laws in Ghana and England share common roots due to the influence of English law on Ghana's legal system during colonial times. However, significant differences have emerged over the years due to local adaptations, statutory developments, and socio-economic contexts. This comparison explores key aspects of mortgage law in both jurisdictions, focusing on legal frameworks, equity of redemption, foreclosure processes, and borrower protections.

1. Legal Frameworks

1. Ghana:
• Governed by the Home Mortgage Finance Act, 2008 (Act 770) and the Land Act, 2020 (Act 1036).
• Dual land tenure systems (customary and statutory) influence mortgage transactions.
• Customary mortgages, recognized under local practices, coexist with statutory mortgages.
2. England:
• Regulated by the Law of Property Act, 1925, and the Financial Services and Markets Act, 2000.
• Mortgages are primarily statutory, with legal and equitable mortgages clearly distinguished.
• The system is centralized, with uniform application across the country.
3. Comparative Insights:
• English mortgage law is more uniform and predictable due to centralized land registration and statutory regulation, whereas Ghana’s system is influenced by its dual land tenure structure.

2. Equity of Redemption

1. Ghana:
• Strongly upheld: borrowers retain the right to redeem the mortgaged property after repayment of the loan.
• Courts in Ghana invalidate agreements attempting to deny this right, as equity of redemption is deemed inalienable.
• Example: Amoako v. Boateng (1998) emphasized the inviolability of this right.
2. England:
• The equity of redemption is foundational in English mortgage law, protecting borrowers from losing their property unjustly.
• Courts strictly prohibit “clogs” or “fetters” on the equity of redemption.
• Example: Fairclough v. Swan Brewery Co. Ltd. (1912) affirmed the principle that restrictions on redemption must not render the right illusory.
3. Comparative Insights:
• Both jurisdictions strongly uphold the equity of redemption, though Ghana’s dual system necessitates judicial interventions to address conflicts between customary and statutory practices.

3. Foreclosure Processes

1. Ghana:
• Foreclosure is a judicial process requiring court orders.
• Borrowers are entitled to a fair valuation of the mortgaged property during foreclosure.
• Challenges include delays in judicial processes and enforcement of judgments.
2. England:
• Foreclosure is rare; instead, lenders typically exercise the power of sale under statutory provisions.
• The process is faster and more streamlined due to centralized land registration and established foreclosure protocols.
• Borrowers can challenge unfair sales or valuations through courts.
3. Comparative Insights:
• England’s foreclosure system is more efficient due to established statutory procedures, whereas Ghana faces delays and complications arising from dual land tenure systems.

4. Borrower Protections

1. Ghana:
• Borrowers are protected through judicial oversight, ensuring fairness in mortgage agreements and foreclosure processes.
• Statutory protections aim to prevent exploitation, but enforcement is sometimes inconsistent.
2. England:
• Borrowers benefit from robust consumer protection laws, such as those under the Consumer Credit Act, 1974, and the Financial Services and Markets Act, 2000.
• Strict regulations on lending practices and transparent disclosure requirements are enforced.
3. Comparative Insights:
• England provides stronger and more consistent borrower protections due to well-developed consumer finance laws. Ghana’s borrower protections rely heavily on judicial intervention.

5. Land Registration and Title Systems

1. Ghana:
• Dual land registration system: the Deeds Registry and the Land Title Registry.
• Challenges include incomplete records, disputes over ownership, and delays in registration.
2. England:
• A centralized and digitized land registry ensures accurate and accessible property records.
• The system simplifies mortgage transactions and reduces disputes over title.
3. Comparative Insights:
• England’s centralized land registry ensures efficiency and clarity, while Ghana’s fragmented system creates complexities in mortgage transactions.

6. Cultural and Economic Contexts

1. Ghana:
• Customary practices significantly influence mortgage transactions, particularly in rural areas.
• High interest rates and limited formal employment hinder mortgage accessibility.
2. England:
• Mortgages are more accessible due to lower interest rates and a stronger financial system.
• The absence of customary practices simplifies mortgage frameworks.
3. Comparative Insights:
• Ghana’s mortgage market reflects its socio-economic realities and dual legal heritage, while England’s system benefits from a uniform statutory approach.

Conclusion

While Ghanaian and English mortgage laws share foundational principles, such as the equity of redemption, they differ significantly in structure, implementation, and efficiency. England’s centralized and statutory-focused system offers predictability and efficiency, whereas Ghana’s dual system reflects its unique socio-cultural and legal context. Addressing challenges in Ghana, such as land registration inefficiencies and high costs, could enhance its mortgage system and align it more closely with international best practices.

Meet the Author

View Profile

---

Emmanuel Amoabeng Gyebi

Accountant

follow me