Estoppel – Res judicata. The claimant lending company, CFB, sought to execute a warrant of possession on property owned by the defendants. The defendants had defaulted on two loans, applying to a house and a set of cottages. A dispute arose as to whether CFB would be prevented by cause of action estoppel from relying upon the house charge as security for the cottages loan. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that CFB would be prevented from doing so, but that the question of whether an enforceable contract had existed so that CFB would not be able to enforce the charge on the house so long as instalments on the house loan were paid would be referred to the county court.