The defendant bank had paid cheques drawn on the plaintiff’s account in breach of a mandate requiring two signatories. The plaintiff brought an action for money had and received.
Held: The action failed. The bank was entitled to the benefit of that payment if it could show that that payment went to discharge a legal liability of the customer. Wright J referred to ‘the equitable doctrine under which a person who has in fact paid the debts of another without authority is allowed to take advantage of his payment’ and continued: ‘I think that the equity I have referred to ought to be extended even in the case where the cheque which was paid was paid out of the credit balance, and was not paid by way of overdraft, so that the banker will be entitled to the benefit of that payment if he can show that that payment went to discharge a legal liability of the customer. The customer in such a case is really no worse off, because the legal liability which has to be discharged is discharged, though it is discharged under circumstances which at common law would not entitle the bank to debit the customer.’
Wright J
[1928] 1 KB 48
England and Wales
Cited by:
Limited – Crantrave Ltd (In Liquidation) v Lloyd’s Bank Plc CA 18-May-2000
The bank received a garnishee order nisi, but acted before it was made absolute to pay the judgment creditor.
Held: The bank had no defence against the customer claiming restitution relying on the equitable doctrine that one person paying the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.427358
