There was a bank robbery and the robber had paid in part of the stolen proceeds into another branch of the same bank and the bank sued the robber to recover the stolen monies after the robber had been convicted of robbery and the robber had claimed that the bank’s claim was one based on an allegation of fraud.
Held: The robber’s claim was rejected. A claimant alleging robbery did not make a ‘charge of fraud’ because robbery did not ‘involve a false representation’.
Lord Denning said: ‘Fraud in ordinary speech means the using of false representations to obtain an unjust advantage: see the definition in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Likewise in law ‘fraud is proved when it is shown that a false representation has been made knowingly or without belief in its truth, or recklessly, careless whether it be true or false’.
Diplock LJ said: ‘ Robbery is not included in the ordinary meaning of the word ‘fraud’ – as the Oxford English Dictionary confirms . . For at least 100 years (see Bullen and Leake’s, Precedents of Pleadings, 3rd ed. (1868)), ‘fraud’ in civil actions at common law, whether as a cause of action or as a defence, has meant an intentional misrepresentation (or, in some cases, concealment) of fact made by one party with the intention of inducing another party to act upon it, which does induce the other party to act upon it to his detriment . . In civil actions it [i.e., fraud] has long had a precise limited meaning as a term of art, and I see no reason for ascribing any wider meaning to it . .’
Russell LJ said: ‘On the construction of the section I agree that this is not an action in which ‘a charge of fraud against . . (the defendant) . . is in issue’. I agree with the Judge that fraud is used here in its ordinary and primary sense of deceit, and not as referring generally to dishonesty.’
Judges:
Lord Denning MR, Diplock LJ, Russell LJ
Citations:
[1967] 2 WLR 166, [1967] 2 QB 738, [1966] 3 All ER 948
Cited by:
Cited – Cavell USA, Inc and Randall v Seaton Insurance Company etc CA 16-Dec-2009
The parties had settled terms for concluding business arrangements between them. The agreement released and referred all claims in law and in equity ‘save for fraud’ to the UK courts. The respondents now wanted to bring a case alleging breach of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Torts – Other
Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.392909