I read about this case in the on line edition of today's Daily Mail.
You never know what to think about newspaper reporting of legal cases, but it seems ( as far as I can see ) that a divorce settlement twenty years or so ago gave the right to live in the FMH until death or re-marriage etc and when the property was sold, then the wife was to have two thirds and the husband the rest. The husband, it seems, had a minor tax debt which had escalated out of all proportion and the Revenue made him bankrupt and enforced the sale of the house to realise the husband's share, with the result the wife was in danger of losing her house.
I wondered whether it would have made any difference if the husband had just had a charge on the property.
If you were a solicitor advising a wife, where the husband was known to be financially irresponsible and prone to running up debts, you wouldn't be that keen on a Mesher order.