Singularis Holdings Ltd v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd: CA 1 Feb 2018

The court was asked whether the defence of illegality is available to allow a bank to defeat a claim in negligence and breach of contract brought by its corporate customer.
Held: The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal. Mr Al Sanea’s fraudulent state of mind could not be attributed to the company; but even if it could, the claim would still have succeeded – the bank’s negligence had caused the loss, it was not defeated by a defence of illegality, or by an equal and opposite claim by the bank for the company’s deceit; and the judge’s finding of 25% contributory negligence was a reasonable one.


Sir Geoffrey Vos Ch, Gloster, McCombe LJJ


[2018] EWCA Civ 84, [2018] WLR(D) 57, [2018] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 472, [2018] PNLR 19, [2018] 1 WLR 2777, [2018] 4 All ER 204, [2018] Bus LR 1115, [2018] 2 All ER (Comm) 975, [2018] 2 BCLC 1


Bailii, WLRD


England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromSingularis Holdings Ltd v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd SC 30-Oct-2019
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Negligence

Updated: 24 April 2022; Ref: scu.604161