Mauritius Supreme Court rules Registrar General cannot refuse registration of private family loans

On April 15, 2026, the Supreme Court of Mauritius delivered a judgment in the case of Avrillon D.P.P. v The Registrar General, quashing the decision of the Registrar General to refuse the inscription of two loan deeds secured by conventional mortgages between a father and his son. The Court held that the refusal was ultra vires the Registrar General’s powers.

The Registrar General had declined the request for registration and inscription on the basis that the loan agreements were illicit transactions, asserting that it was legally in order for the Conservator of Mortgages to decline to give publicity to the transactions. In support of his refusal, the Registrar General relied on several grounds, including alleged non-compliance with the Banking Act, contending that the lender was required to hold a moneylender's licence.

The Supreme Court's ruling reaffirms that a private individual who grants a one-off personal loan to a family member at non-abusive interest rates does not fall within the definition of a 'moneylender' under the Banking Act and does not require a licence from the Bank of Mauritius. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that the Registrar General, acting in his capacity as Conservator of Mortgages, is required to inscribe deeds that are regularly presented for registration and may not refuse inscription based on his own assessment of the legality of the underlying transaction, except where the hypothecary right is manifestly devoid of legal existence.

This judgment clarifies the limits of the Registrar General's authority and underscores the importance of adhering to statutory duties without overstepping legal boundaries. It also provides reassurance to individuals engaging in private loan agreements within family contexts, affirming that such transactions, when conducted lawfully, should not be subject to undue interference by registration authorities.