In Abbey National Building Society v Cann, the House of Lords held that a mortgagee who has funded the purchase of the mortgaged title to land (an “acquisition creditor”) has a right over the land that binds any other grantee of the purchaser. This article considers the basis for and limits of this principle, in light of its origins. It argues that the cases treat the lender's financial contribution as an independent source of an equitable interest in the purchased asset, rather than as a reason why the grant in favour of the lender takes effect earlier in time than the grant in favour of any third party. This has important and desirable consequences for the scope of the principle, rendering it more coherent with general principles of English property law and allowing for an apportionment solution in some situations involving co-contributors to acquisition.

在Abbey National Building Society v Cann，上议院认为，资助购买抵押土地所有权的抵押权人（“收购债权人”）对土地拥有约束购买者的任何其他受让人的权利。本文根据其起源考虑该原则的基础和限制。它辩称，这些案件将贷方的财务贡献视为购买资产的公平权益的独立来源，而不是作为有利于贷方的赠款比有利于任何第三方的赠款更早生效的原因. 这对该原则的范围产生了重要且理想的影响，使其与英国财产法的一般原则更加一致，并允许在某些涉及收购共同出资人的情况下采用分摊解决方案。