Aiken v Short: 1856

The testator made one will under which C was to be a residuary legatee. He then made a second will under which C was only to take a defeasible annuity. After the T’s death, S advanced andpound;200 to C on the security of an equitable charge of C’s interest under the first will. S died, the defendant being his executrix. Subsequently a bank (represented by the plaintiff) advanced money to C who conveyed to the bank his supposed interest under the first will subject to S’s interest. The defendant applied to C for the payment of the andpound;200 and interest. C referred the defendant to the bank by whom C’s debt to S was paid. The second will was then discovered and the bank sought recovery from the defendant of the money paid to her.
Held: Pollock CB said the defendant had the right to receive the money owed by C, and said that he thought that the bank must be considered to have paid that sum for C. He said that the case seemed to him to fall within the class of cases in which a man has paid money ‘in his own wrong’. He continued: ‘It may, also, be put upon this ground, that the bankers paid this money rather as the agents of . . . C than as their own money. If so, it cannot be recovered back.’ Platt B referred to the defendant wanting the payment by C of his debt and applying to C for payment. He said: ‘He refers her to the bank. They, acting as his agents, upon being referred to, pay his debt. How can that be properly recoverable? Surely the debt is satisfied. The debt was due. It is not as though there were no debt due, and there was a mistake of fact; but here the debt was actually due, and the money was paid to satisfy that debt. It appears to me clear, beyond all question, that this money cannot be recovered back.’

Judges:

Pollock CB, Platt B, Bramwell B

Citations:

(1856) 1 H and N 210

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLloyds Bank Plc v Independent Insurance Co Ltd CA 26-Nov-1998
The bank had made an electronic transfer of funds for a customer in satisfaction of that customer’s proper debt, but it was done under a mistake of fact as to the cleared status of funds received.
Held: The appeal was turned down. The bank was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Equity

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.246225