Section 3: operative section for consent of the non-owning spouse i.e. a spouse cannot transfer an interest in the FH without the consent of the non-owning spouse. This consent must be in writing, must be prior (Nestor v Murphy), and must be valid i.e. must be voluntary and fully informed. In BOI v Smyth: husband mortgaged lands for debt, and his wife was required to give consent. The bank making the loan explained why consent was required but did not explain that if the husband went into arrears the FH could be possessed. She also did not get independent legal advice. SC invalidated her consent, noting that BOI was fixed with constructive notice of her lack of understanding and invalidity of consent. Being on notice to lack of consent refers to good faith i.e. the purchaser for value buys the property in good faith that they are not affecting any rights of the non-owning spouse: Somers v Weir (as they are on notice due to the doctrine of notice, they should make their own enquiries). AIB v Finnegan: purchaser will have to prove that he did not have notice that the property was a FH. This section does not however create a property right for the non-owning spouse and this is well established by case law. Barclays Bank v Carroll: only the non-owning is afforded protection under FHPA i.e. the right is personal to them and transactions are voidable at their behest only. Hamilton v Hamilton: 6 year time limit to declare conveyances void, which runs from the date of the conveyance. Section 28 2010 Act: same protection to the non-owning CP. There are a number of notable exceptions to the rule to require consent including: (a) pre-nuptial agreement; (b) conveyances to a purchaser for full value (although see point on notice above); (c) conveyance of an interest by a person other than a spouse; and (d) court orders in judicial separation when the FH is vested in one spouse following a separation.