Brink’s Mat Ltd v Noye: CA 1991

The proceeds of the theft of gold bullion from a warehouse owned by the plaintiffs were laundered through the bank account of a company called Scadlynn Ltd with Barclays Bank. The directors and sole shareholders of Scadlynn were signatories of the account and drew cheques on it for cash totalling nearly andpound;8m over four months. The plaintiffs sought to enforce rights which Scadlynn was said to possess against the bank in consequence of the payments out of its account. The court was asked whether the pleading should be permitted, raising in turn the question, among others, whether it was open to Scadlynn to sue the bank in respect of withdrawals made or authorised by the company’s sole directors and shareholders.
Held: there was no reason why Scadlynn, which was being put into compulsory liquidation, should be prevented from enforcing such a claim for the benefit of the creditors who would look to the assets for the satisfaction of their debts.
Nicholls LJ described the existence of the directors’ fiduciary duties to the company as a means by which the law sought to protect the company’s creditors.
Mustill LJ rightly described Scadlyn as being an intended victim of arrangements intended dishonestly to deprive it of a large part of its assets and Nicholls LJ agreed with him.

Judges:

Mustill and Nicholls LJJ and Sir Roualeyn Cumming-Bruce

Citations:

[1991] 1 Bank LR 68

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedJetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others SC 22-Apr-2015
The liquidators of Bilta had brought proceedings against former directors and the appellant alleging that they were party to an unlawful means conspiracy which had damaged the company by engaging in a carousel fraud with carbon credits. On the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Company

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.566002

Shanning International Ltd v Lloyds TSB Bank plc; Lloyds TSB Bank plc v Rasheed Bank and another: ComC 17 Dec 1999

The parties were linked together by a series of bonds, deposits, and guarantees and indemnities which had been designed to enable trade with a customer in Iraq. The Regulation operated to prevent any claim being made under the bond, and therefore the bank could not resist an action for the repayment of a deposit on the basis that it might be called upon under its own bond.

Judges:

Langley J

Citations:

Times 19-Jan-2000, [1999] EWHC 280 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EEC) No 3541/92

Cited by:

Appeal fromShanning International Limited (In Liquidation) v Lloyds TSB Bank Plc (Formerly Lloyds Bank Plc) Part 20 and Rasheed Bank and Sbg Holdings Limited Part 20 CA 25-May-2000
. .
At first instanceShanning International Ltd (in liquidation) v Lloyds Bank plc Lloyds Bank plc v Rasheed Bank HL 2-Jul-2001
Under a series of cross guarantees, equipment was supplied to Iraq. Final payment was due on delivery of the final equipment. Before it could be delivered, the prohibitions came into effect against satisfying or making any claims in connection with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, European

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89188

JP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation and others: ComC 25 Jul 2008

Judges:

Gloster J DBE

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1793 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation ComC 14-Mar-2005
The defendants had invested money through the claimants, but had suffered severe losses. The claimants sought a declaration that they had no liability for such losses. The defendants counterclaimed that the claimants were liable in negligence, . .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation CA 20-Dec-2005
The defendants appealed against an order striking out four paragraphs of its defence and counterclaim. . .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation CA 2-Mar-2006
The parties disputed the attempt to strike out part of the defendant’s claim relating to shipping losses. . .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation ComC 3-Nov-2006
. .
See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation Comc 27-May-2008
The company alleged negligence by its financial advisers.
Held: Gloster J said that the absence of a written advisory agreement is a strong pointer against the existence of a free-standing duty of care to give investment advice.
Gloster . .

Cited by:

See AlsoJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corp ComC 21-Nov-2008
. .
CitedJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corp ComC 20-Feb-2009
The court heard an application for leave to appeal against orders. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.272539

Rolls Razor Ltd v Cox: CA 1967

Winn LJ said: ‘the relationship of banker and customer upon a current account implies from its very nature an intention on the part of both parties that debits and credits arising between them shall be brought into a running account on which by reason of the customary method of keeping such account, there will at any given moment be an outstanding debit or credit balance.’

Judges:

Winn LJ

Citations:

[1967] 1 QB 552

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedOffice of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others ComC 24-Apr-2008
The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.267117

Price Meats Ltd v Barclays Bank Plc: ChD 30 Nov 1999

Although a customer always had a clear duty to inform its bankers of any forgery of which it was aware insofar as it related to dealings with the bank, that duty did not operate when the knowledge of the customer was only constructive and not actual. In this case the bank had become concerned and had warned the customer of the need to enquire as to the history of transactions, but such warning did not create an actual knowledge on the customers part of the reality of forgery eventually discovered.

Citations:

Times 19-Jan-2000, [1999] EWHC Ch 190

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking, Consumer

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.85035

Mortgage Corporation Ltd v Shaire and Another: ChD 25 Feb 2000

The claimant had an equitable charge over the property, and sought a possession order after failures to keep up repayments. The order was sought under the Act, and the claimants asserted that the conditions for the grant of possession were unchanged.
Held: Parliament had clearly intended a change. The interests of a chargee ranked alongside those of, for example, children living in the house. This might act to the detriment of banks, and the old authorities, whilst not entirely irrelevant, should be viewed with caution. Where the parties have reached a consensus on the beneficial interests in the property, the court will give effect to it, unless there is very good reason for not doing so, such as a subsequent renegotiation.

Judges:

Neuberger J

Citations:

Gazette 16-Mar-2000, Times 21-Mar-2000, [2000] 1 FLR 973, [2001] Ch 743, [2000] EWHC Ch 452

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 14 15, Law of Property Act 1925 30

Cited by:

CitedStack v Dowden CA 13-Jul-2005
The parties purchased a property together. The transfer contained a survivorship restriction but no declaration of the beneficial interests. The judge had held the property to be held as tenants in commn on equal shares.
Held: In a case where . .
CitedStack v Dowden HL 25-Apr-2007
The parties had cohabited for a long time, in a home bought by Ms Dowden. After the breakdown of the relationship, Mr Stack claimed an equal interest in the second family home, which they had bought in joint names. The House was asked whether, when . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Banking, Trusts

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.83867

Goss and others v Laurence George Chilcott As Liquidator of Central Acceptance Limited (In Liquidation): PC 23 May 1996

(New Zealand) Mr and Mrs Goss, had been granted a loan by the claimant finance company under a mortgage instrument that had been avoided by the claimant because it had been fraudulently altered by Mr Haddon, an employee of the claimant, without the claimant’s authority. Mr Haddon was the brother of Mrs Goss. The advance from the claimant having been made available to Mr and Mrs Goss, it was as agreed between them and Mr Haddon in fact received by Mr Haddon. Mr and Mrs Goss took no security from Mr Haddon. Mr Haddon was unable to repay the advance. Mr and Mrs Goss argued that their inability to recover the money from Mr Haddon constituted a defence of change of position to the claimant’s action for restitution of the money paid for a consideration that had totally failed.
Held: The loan remained repayable despite the unenforceability of the mortgage instrument under which it was secured. The defence failed because Mr and Mrs Goss knew that the money lent would have to be repaid to the claimant and, in paying it to Mr Haddon, they had taken the risk that the loss would fall on them.
Lord Goff said: ‘From the beginning, the Defendants were under an obligation to repay the advance once it had been paid to them or to their order; and this obligation was of course unaffected by the fact that they had allowed the money to be paid over to Mr Haddon. The effect of the alteration of the mortgage instrument was that their contractual obligation to repay the money was discharged; but they had nevertheless been enriched by the receipt of the money, and prima facie were liable in restitution to restore it. They had however allowed the money to be paid over to Mr Haddon in circumstances in which, as they well knew, the money would nevertheless have to be repaid to the company. They had, therefore, in allowing the money to be paid to Mr Haddon, deliberately taken the risk that he would be unable to repay the money, in which event they themselves would have to repay it without recourse to him. Since any action by them against Mr Haddon would now be fruitless they are seeking, by invoking the defence of change of position, to shift that loss onto the company. This, in their Lordships’ opinion, they cannot do. The fact that they cannot now obtain reimbursement from Mr Haddon does not, in the circumstances of the present case, render it inequitable for them to be required to make restitution to the company in respect of the enrichment which they have received at the company’s expense.’

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Cooke of Thorndon

Citations:

Gazette 12-Jun-1996, Times 06-Jun-1996, [1996] UKPC 17, [1996] AC 788

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDavidson, Public Officer, &Amp;C v Cooper And Another 6-Jul-1844
. .
CitedFibrosa Spolka Akcyjna v Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbour Ltd HL 15-Jun-1942
A contract for the supply by the respondents of special machinery to be manufactured by them was treated as an ordinary contract for the sale of goods. It began valid, but suffered frustration by the outbreak of war.
Held: Lord Wright restated . .
CitedDavid Securities Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia 7-Oct-1992
(High Court of Australia ) Restitution – Money paid under mistake – Mistake of law – Right to recover – Unjust enrichment – Defences – Change of position. . .

Cited by:

CitedKommune and Another v DEPFA Acs Bank ComC 4-Sep-2009
Local authorities in Denmark sought to recover sums paid to the defendant banks for swap trading, saying that the payments had been outwith their powers. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Commonwealth, Equity

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80939

Depositors Protection Board v Dalia and Another: ChD 18 Nov 1992

Equitable assignees of deposits in a bank where those deposits were protected under the scheme, were entitled to the compensation which would have been paid to the beneficial owners.

Citations:

Gazette 18-Nov-1992

Statutes:

Banking Act 1987 59(1)(a)

Cited by:

Appeal fromDepositors’ Protection Board v Dalia and Another CA 11-May-1993
The Board was liable to pay compensation claims from equitable assignees of depositors with a failed bank. They were not to be excluded from making claims. . .
At First InstanceDepositors’ Protection Board v Dalia HL 20-May-1994
The House was asked as to the meaning of the word ‘depositor’. Regulations were prayed in aid which were made four years after the date of the enactment.
Held: The protection given by the Depositor Protection Scheme does not extend to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Banking, Financial Services

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79917

Depositors’ Protection Board v Dalia: HL 20 May 1994

The House was asked as to the meaning of the word ‘depositor’. Regulations were prayed in aid which were made four years after the date of the enactment.
Held: The protection given by the Depositor Protection Scheme does not extend to equitable assignees of deposits. Such assignees are not depositors within the meaning of the scheme. Lord Browne-Wilkinson said that regulations could only be used an aid to construction where the regulations are roughly contemporaneous with the Act being construed.
After a legal assignment only the assignee can be said to have any entitlement against the Defendant.

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

Citations:

Times 20-May-1994, Gazette 29-Jun-1994, Independent 31-May-1994, [1994] 2 AC 367, [1994] 2 AC 367

Statutes:

Banking Act 1987 58(1)

Citing:

Appeal fromDepositors’ Protection Board v Dalia and Another CA 11-May-1993
The Board was liable to pay compensation claims from equitable assignees of depositors with a failed bank. They were not to be excluded from making claims. . .
At First InstanceDepositors Protection Board v Dalia and Another ChD 18-Nov-1992
Equitable assignees of deposits in a bank where those deposits were protected under the scheme, were entitled to the compensation which would have been paid to the beneficial owners. . .

Cited by:

CitedA, Regina (on The Application of) v B; Regina (A) v Director of Establishments of the Security Service SC 9-Dec-2009
B, a former senior member of the security services wished to publish his memoirs. He was under contractual and statutory obligations of confidentiality. He sought judicial review of a decision not to allow him to publish parts of the book, saying it . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v Forde and McHugh Ltd SC 26-Feb-2014
The Court heard a number of appeals concerned with the interpretation of the phrase in section 6(1) of the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992, ‘[w]here in any tax week earnings are paid to or for the benefit of an earner’ It was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Financial Services

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79916

Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank Plc: CA 15 Sep 1999

A bank had a clause in its standard terms which provided that it could continue to recover interest at the contract rate after judgment for default. The clause was an unfair term. The clause allowed a bank to impose an arrangement for repayment by instalments without the court having the opportunity to judge the level of such payments. The bank undertook to add information about the procedure and no injunction was given to prevent it relying upon the clause.
‘It is trite law in England that once a judgment is obtained under a loan agreement for a principal sum and judgment is entered, the contract merges in the judgment and the principal becomes owed under the judgment and not under the contract. If under the contract interest on any principal sum is due, absent special provisions the contract is considered ancillary to the covenant to pay the principal, with the result that if judgment is obtained for the principal, the covenant to pay interest merges in the judgment. Parties to a contract may agree that a covenant to pay interest will not merge in any judgment for the principal sum due, and in that event interest may be charged under the contract on the principal sum due even after judgment for that sum.’

Judges:

Peter Gibson, Waller and Buxton LJJ

Citations:

Times 21-Sep-1999, Gazette 15-Sep-1999, Gazette 17-Feb-2000, Times 14-Mar-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 27, [2000] QB 672

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1994 (1994 No 3159)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromDirector General of Fair Trading v First National Bank Plc ChD 30-Jul-1999
The claimants sought an injunction under the regulations to prevent the defendant bank from including in any of its agreements a clause allowing them to claim interest on judgments on regulated agreements. . .
CitedIn re Sneyd; Ex parte Fewings CA 1883
The mortgagee’s costs, whether costs of an enforcement or a redemption action or included in ‘costs, charges and expenses’, are not recoverable from the mortgagor personally, but both as against the mortgagor and other persons interested in the . .
CitedEaling London Borough Council v El Isaac CA 1980
Templeman LJ said: ‘I do not for myself understand how a debt payable with interest until actual repayment can be merged in a judgment without interest or with a different rate of interest payable thereafter.’ . .
CitedBank of Scotland v Davis SCS 1982
A bank’s borrower’s covenant to pay interest is ordinarily to be taken to continue until the full sum of principal is repaid, after as before judgment. An appeal was allowed from the order of the sheriff in an undefended action for repayment of a . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromDirector General of Fair Trading v First National Bank HL 25-Oct-2001
The House was asked whether a contractual provision for interest to run after judgment as well as before in a consumer credit contract led to an unfair relationship.
Held: The term was not covered by the Act, and was not unfair under the . .
CitedOffice of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd ChD 17-Jul-2008
Complaint was made that the Foxtons standard terms of acting in residential lettings were unfair. Foxtons objected to the jurisdiction of the Claimant to intervene.
Held: On a challenge to an individual contract, the court would be able to see . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79974

CIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another: HL 21 Oct 1993

Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to the existence of undue influence only because a loan was to be made in joint names. It must have some actual notice of that undue influence. In cases of undue influence disadvantage is not a necessary ingredient of the cause of action. It is not essential that the transaction should be disadvantageous to the pressurised or influenced person in any way. A balance is to be found between the protection of a wife from improper pressure, and the need for banks to have predictable consequences of making secured loans. ‘What, then, was known to the plaintiff that could put it on inquiry so as to fix it with constructive notice? So far as the plaintiff was aware, the transaction consisted of a loan to husband and wife to finance the discharge of an existing mortgage on [the matrimonial home], and as to the balance to be applied in buying a holiday home. The loan was advanced to husband and wife jointly. There was nothing to indicate to the plaintiff that this was anything other than a normal advance to husband and wife for their joint benefit.’

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

Citations:

Gazette 17-Dec-1993, Independent 22-Oct-1993, Times 22-Oct-1993, [1994] 1 AC 200, [1993] 3 WLR 802, [1993] 4 All ER 433, [1993] UKHL 7

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

CitedNational Westminster Bank plc v Morgan HL 7-Mar-1985
Undue influence was alleged.
Held: Equity avoids dispositions of property procured by the improper or unconscientious use of the influence of one person over another, that cannot be explained on the grounds of friendship, charity or other . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another CA 22-May-1992
A bank leaving a husband to explain a proposed charge over the matrimonial home to his wife to secure his business debts, could not enforce that charge against her. There was a presumption of undue influence in the husband which made the charge . .
CitedAllcard v Skinner CA 1887
The donor had parted with almost all her property. She now sought to have the transaction set aside for undue influence.
Held: Where a wife has entered into a gratuitous transaction with her husband, the burden was on the husband as donee to . .
CitedPoosathurai v Kannappa Chettiar PC 1919
. .
DisapprovedBank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Aboody CA 1989
In a case where the defendant said that a mortgage had been signed from undue pressure the court may find actual undue influence as opposed to presumed undue influence. Slade LJ said: ‘Ever since the judgments of this court in Allcard v Skinner a . .

Cited by:

CitedUCB Corporate Services Limited v Williams CA 2-May-2002
The wife of a borrower sought to defend a claim for possession of the property by the chargor. She claimed that he signature had been obtained by an equitable fraud.
Held: Undue influence occurred when improper means of persuasion were used to . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
CitedUCB Group Ltd v Hedworth CA 4-Dec-2003
The defendant challenged the claimant’s right to possession under a legal charge. She appealed a finding that she had not established the undue influence of her husband, a solicitor.
Held: A lender who received a voidable security was entitled . .
CitedSandra Estelle Fielding v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc CA 11-Feb-2004
The husband and wife had signed a bank mandate allowing the bank to act upon the authorisation of either of them. The wife complained that the bank should not be able to recover from her any sums expended by the husband.
Held: The mandate . .
CitedVale v Armstrong, Armstrong ChD 21-May-2004
The claimant sought to set aside a transfer of his house to the defendants made at an undervalue and under an enduring power of attorney, who had charged it to raise money for their business. He had received independent advice.
Held: The . .
CitedBarclays Bank Plc v Boulter and Another HL 26-Oct-1999
The question of whether notice of certain facts amounted to constructive notice of other facts is a question of law. Where it was claimed that a party should be exempt from liability under a document which it was claimed was signed because of . .
CitedRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Undue Influence, Banking

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79133

Cheah Theam Swee v Equitcorp Finance Group Ltd and Another: PC 5 Nov 1991

(New Zealand) A had given two charges over his shares to different lenders. The charges came to be both owned by the same person, who obtained judgment under the first charge, but then exercised its power of sale under the second, waiving its priority under the first. The chargor complained that the chargee should have exercised his power under the first charge which would have discharged the judgment.
Held: Owners of different mortgagees of a property can agree to alter the priority of their respective charges irrespective of the wishes of the chargor, and without needing his consent. The mortgagor had no control over which remedy was taken by the chargees.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Jan-1992, [1991] 4 All ER 989, [1991] UKPC 39

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

DistinguishedPalmer v Hendrie 1859
. .
See AlsoCheah Theam Swee v Equiticorp Finance Group Ltd. And, Equiticorp Nominees Ltd PC 12-Jul-1989
New Zealand . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Banking, Commonwealth

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78999

Card Protection Plan Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: HL 6 Feb 2001

The appellants sold a system protecting credit card holders against the consequences of loss or theft. They claimed that it was insurance and exempt from VAT. The commissioners said it was a service and vatable. The card provided a range of services for those who had lost a card, and laid off the costs against their own re-insurance. The European Court had defined insurance as the payment of a premium, to provide the insured, in the event of materialisation of the risk covered, with the service agreed when the contract was concluded. The commissioners held that two services were included, one of insurance, and one of the registration of an individual’s card and other details.
Held: The dominant purpose of the contract was for insurance. Others were ancillary or minor. (Slynn) ‘the court’s task is to have regard to the ‘essential features of the transaction’ to see whether it is ‘several distinct principal services’ or a single service and that what from an economic point of view is in reality a single service should not be ‘artificially split’. It seems that an overall view should be taken and over-zealous dissecting and analysis of particular clauses should be avoided.’ The court should asking itself ‘what is the essential feature of the scheme or its dominant purpose – perhaps why objectively people are likely to want to join it’.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle Lord Nolan Lord Steyn Lord Hoffmann

Citations:

Times 06-Feb-2001, Gazette 01-Mar-2001, [2001] UKHL 4, [2001] 2 ALL ER 143, [2001] 2 WLR 329, [2002] 1 AC 202

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Sixth Council Directive (77/388/EEC) (OJ 1977 L145/1), Value Added Tax Act 1983 17(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Referred backCard Protection Plan Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 25-Feb-1999
A company procuring insurance purchases for credit card protection was as exempt from VAT as was the insurer. A provision which restricted the ability to claim such exemption to those registered as insurers under national was invalid under European . .

Cited by:

Referred backCard Protection Plan Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ECJ 25-Feb-1999
A company procuring insurance purchases for credit card protection was as exempt from VAT as was the insurer. A provision which restricted the ability to claim such exemption to those registered as insurers under national was invalid under European . .
CitedCollege of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise ChD 13-Nov-2003
The college appealed a finding that the supply of course manuals to its students was part of its exempt rather than zero-rated supply.
Held: ‘Once it is decided that there is a single supply from an economic view which should not be . .
CitedCollege of Estate Management v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 11-Aug-2004
When offering courses to distance learning students, the College offered materials for the courses. As part of the course this supply would be exempt, as books, the supply would be zero-rated, but the taxpayer would be able to reclaim its VAT . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Banking, Insurance

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78887

Box and Others v Barclays Bank Plc: ChD 30 Apr 1998

A depositor who had placed sums with an illegal deposit taking business was not entitled to claim that sum held in trust because he still had a statutory claim under contract with the deposit taker.

Citations:

Times 30-Apr-1998, Gazette 07-May-1998, [1998] Lloyd’s Rep Bank 185

Statutes:

Banking Act 1987

Cited by:

CitedJeremy D Stone Consultants Ltd and Another v National Westminster Bank Plc and Another ChD 11-Feb-2013
The claimants asserted an equitable claim against funds held by the defendant bank in the name of a company owned by another defendant who they said defrauded them through a Ponzi investment scheme.
Held: The claim failed. On the evidence, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78520

Bank of Credit and Commers Hong Kong Ltd v Sonali Bank: QBD 20 Oct 1994

There was no basis for a forum switch to Bangladesh of an action as of right under UK law. Under a Letter of Credit it is desirable that the same system of law should govern the co-existing contracts between (a) the issuing bank and the beneficiary, (b) the confirming bank and the beneficiary, (c) the issuing bank and the confirming bank.

Citations:

Independent 20-Oct-1994, [1995] 1 Lloyds Rep 227

Cited by:

CitedPt Pan Indonesia Bank Ltd Tbk v Marconi Communications International Ltd CA 27-Apr-2005
The parties disputed the jurisdiction of the English courts over a letter of credit. It foresaw payment here and in sterling, made by the English bank as against the appropriate documents. Authority had been given for service out of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78302

Barclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another: CA 22 May 1992

A bank leaving a husband to explain a proposed charge over the matrimonial home to his wife to secure his business debts, could not enforce that charge against her. There was a presumption of undue influence in the husband which made the charge defective.

Citations:

Gazette 15-Jul-1992, [1992] 4 All ER 983, [1993] QB 109

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal fromBarclays Bank Plc v O’Brien and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
The wife joined in a charge on the family home to secure her husband’s business borrowings. The husband was found to have misrepresented to her the effect of the deed, and the bank had been aware that she might be reluctant to sign the deed.
CitedCIBC Mortgages Plc v Pitt and Another HL 21-Oct-1993
Mrs Pitt resisted an order for possession of the house saying that she had signed the mortgage only after misrepresentations by and the undue infuence of her husband who was acting as the bank’s agent.
Held: A bank was not put on enquiry as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Undue Influence

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78212

Bank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd (In Liqidation) and Others v Price Waterhouse and Others, Abu Dhabi Etc: ChD 25 Jun 1997

A banker disclosing information about a customer’s business affairs save under lawful requirement, would commit a criminal offence. The head of a member of a Federation, the Ruler of Abu Dhabi, was not entitled to immunity while the President of the entity of which Abu Dhabi formed part, namely the United Arab Emirates, was entitled to state immunity.

Judges:

Laddie J

Citations:

Times 25-Jun-1997, [1997] 4 All ER 108

Statutes:

Banking Act 1987 82(1)

Citing:

See AlsoBank of Credit and Commerce International (Overseas) Ltd v Price Waterhouse ChD 7-Feb-1997
No duty of care was owed by accountants who were not auditors to lenders to the company audited. The claim was struck out. . .

Cited by:

CitedAlamieyeseigha, Regina (on the Application Of) v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 25-Nov-2005
The defendant argued that as Governor and Chief Excecutive of Bayelsa State in Nigeria he had sovereign immunity. The Foreign Office had issued a certificate that the defendant was not a Head of States under the 1978 Act. The A-G of Bayelsa had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78133

First National Bank Plc v Syed: CA 1991

The court can exercise the supervisory jurisdiction over consumer contracts under the 1974 Act irrespective of any application made by a party.

Judges:

Dillon LJ, Ralph Gibson LJ

Citations:

[1991] 1 All ER 250

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNolan v Wright ChD 26-Feb-2009
The defendant sought to re-open the question of whether the charge under which he might otherwise be liable was an extortionate credit bargain. The creditor said that that plea was time barred. The defendant argued that a finding that the agreement . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Consumer

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.304584

The Chartered Mercantile Bank of India, London, and China v Thomas Dickson And Christopher Tatham, Lately Trading As Dickson, Tatham And Co: 28 Jan 1871

The law with regard to time for the presentation of a Promissory Note payable on demand, requires that the presentation for payment be made within a reasonable time – that is, a period reasonable with reference to the circumstances
connected with each particular case.

Citations:

[1871] EngR 6, (1871) 7 Moo PC NS 1, (1871) 17 ER 213

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.280187

AIB Finance Ltd v Debtors: ChD 10 Apr 1997

A Statutory Demand is only finally decided after the failure of a set aside application.

Judges:

Carnwath J

Citations:

Times 10-Apr-1997, [1997] 2 BCLC 354

Statutes:

Rules of the Supreme Court O59R10(2)

Cited by:

Appeal fromAIB Finance Ltd v Debtors (Alsop and Another) CA 11-Mar-1998
The duty of care of a lender to get the best price for repossessed properties, was not broken when the business closed before repossession, and the property was not sold as a going concern. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Banking

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77680

Swiss Bank Corporation v Brink’s MAT Ltd: 1986

Citations:

[1986] QB 853

Cited by:

CitedDeep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation HL 8-Dec-2005
The appellants had suffered deep vein thrombosis whilst travelling on long haul air flights. The defendants said that their liability was limited because the injuries were not accidents.
Held: The claimants’ appeal failed. The definition of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.236604

Re Bishop, Dec’d: 1965

An investment bought in the name of one from monies in the joint account will prima facie belong to the person in whose name the investment has been bought.

Citations:

[1965] Ch 450

Cited by:

CitedSandra Estelle Fielding v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc CA 11-Feb-2004
The husband and wife had signed a bank mandate allowing the bank to act upon the authorisation of either of them. The wife complained that the bank should not be able to recover from her any sums expended by the husband.
Held: The mandate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.194781

Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Fielding: ChD 2 May 2003

The claimant challenged being held liable for substantial borrowings made by her husband on their joint account. She originally agreed a limit of andpound;200,000, but the bank agreed to vary this with the husband to over 3 million pounds. She had signed a joint mandate.
Held: The wife had not known the full extent of the borrowings. It could not be inferred that an abuse of confidence had taken place. If the bank were authorised by the joint mandate to grant an implied request for a loan (tacit sole borrowing), then meeting an express request (sole facility borrowing) would also be authorised.

Judges:

Mr Justice Hart

Citations:

Gazette 03-Jul-2003, Times 16-May-2003, [2003] EWHC 986 (Ch)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed toSandra Estelle Fielding v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc CA 11-Feb-2004
The husband and wife had signed a bank mandate allowing the bank to act upon the authorisation of either of them. The wife complained that the bank should not be able to recover from her any sums expended by the husband.
Held: The mandate . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromSandra Estelle Fielding v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc CA 11-Feb-2004
The husband and wife had signed a bank mandate allowing the bank to act upon the authorisation of either of them. The wife complained that the bank should not be able to recover from her any sums expended by the husband.
Held: The mandate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.184714

Evans v London and Provincial Bank: 1917

Only nominal damages were awarded by a jury for damage to the plaintiff’s reputation after his bank had wrongly failed to pay on his cheque.

Citations:

(1917) 3 LDAB 152

Cited by:

CitedKpohraror v Woolwich Building Society CA 1996
The Society, acting as a bank, had at first failed to pay its customer’s cheque for andpound;4,550, even though there were sufficient funds. The bank said that it had been reported lost. The customer sought damages to his business reputation.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Damages

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.495213

Re Hi-Fi Equipment (Cabinets) Limited: ChD 11 Jun 1987

The company had charged by way of a first fixed charge all future freehold and leasehold property together with trade fixtures and otherwise. The company used heavy machinery which rested on the floor of its premises. The chargee claimed a fixed charge over the machinery.
Held: The charge created one fixed charge over ‘fixed plant and machinery’. Machinery which merely rested on the premises did not meet the requirement of being firmly attached to the premises. The machinery was therefore subject only to the floating charge and was available to the general creditors.

Judges:

Harman J

Citations:

[1988] BCLC 65

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedReynolds v Ashby and Son HL 1904
Machines had been affixed to the premises. The court was asked whether they were caught by a fixed charge over the company’s land and fixed assets.
Held: The machines were fixed by bolts only and no damage would be caused to the building by . .
CitedHulme v Brigham 1943
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.272306

Smith and another v Lloyds TSB Group plc: QBD 23 Dec 1999

A cheque was altered and presented and paid through an account operated by the defendants. The claimants asserted that the collecting bank had converted the cheque and were liable to repay its value. The cheque having been fraudulently altered, it was held that it had, under the Act, ceased to be a cheque as such, it became avoided, and neither collecting nor paying bank were liable for its face value in conversion.

Citations:

Times 23-Dec-1999

Statutes:

Bills of Exchange Act 1882 64, Cheques Act 1957 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking, Torts – Other

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.89318

Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society: CA 10 Jan 1996

The defendants had wrongfully refused payment of the claimant’s cheque for pounds 4,550. The error was realised on the same day, and corrected. The master awarded damages of pounds 5,550 as general damages to the claimant’s credit by reason of the dishonour. It was argued that as the claimant was not in business he could not recover general damages relating to loss of credit. The cheque had been drawn in a business transaction.
Held: It was open to the court to hold that the master had been right to award more than a nominal sum by way of general damages.
Evans LJ stated: ‘It is abundantly clear, in my judgment, that history has changed the social factors which moulded the rule in the nineteenth century. It is not only a tradesman of whom it can be said that the refusal to meet his cheque is ‘so obviously injurious to [his] credit’ that he should ‘recover, without allegation of special damage, reasonable compensation for the injury done to his credit’ (see [1920] AC 102 at 112, [1918-19] All ER Rep 1035 at 1037 per Lord Birkenhead LC). The credit rating of individuals is as important for their personal transactions, including mortgages and hire-purchase as well as banking facilities, as it is for those who are engaged in trade, and it is notorious that central registers are now kept. I would have no hesitation in holding that what is in effect a presumption of some damage arises in every case, in so far as this is a presumption of fact.’ and
‘The contentions for both parties were presented as if in a straitjacket imposed by the strict application of the rule in Hadley v. Baxendale so as to require the separate consideration of each of the two limbs . . I would prefer to hold that the starting point for any application of Hadley v Baxendale is the extent of the shared knowledge of both parties when the contract was made . . When that is established, it may often be the case that the first and second parts of the rule overlap, or at least that it is unnecessary to draw a clear line of demarcation between them.’

Judges:

Evans LJ

Citations:

Gazette 10-Jan-1996, Independent 04-Jan-1996, Times 08-Dec-1995, [1996] 4 All ER 119

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWilson v United Counties Bank Ltd HL 1920
Bank’s duty to client’s reputation and credit
Major Wilson had left England on active service soon after the beginning of the Great War, leaving his business affairs, in a fairly precarious state, with his bank. The jury found that the bank had failed in its duty to supervise his business . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Banking

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.82834

Citibank International Plc v Schleider et Al: ChD 26 Mar 1999

The purpose of the section was to prevent a lender using a second collateral agreement to circumvent the provisions of the Act restricting his freedom to include provisions detrimental to the borrower in the main agreement.

Citations:

Times 26-Mar-1999

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 113(8)

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.79143

Barclays Bank Plc v Hendricks and Another: ChD 3 Nov 1995

The wife was co-owner of the family home. Her husband owed money to the bank. He separated from his wife and left the matrimonial home moving to another house owned by the wife. The bank obtained a charging order absolute against the husband’s interest in the matrimonial home and then sought an order under section 30 of the Law of Property Act, 1925 for the sale of the house. The Deputy Master made that order and the wife appealed asking the court to exercise its discretion to defer the sale of the house until all of the children of the family had reached the age of 18 or completed full time education.
Held: The court applied Abbey National -v- Moss and dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order made under s.30. The chargee was in the same position and subject to the same reasoning as Mrs Moss. She was unable, save in exceptional circumstances, to prevent the sale of a house by a chargee.

Judges:

Laddie J

Citations:

Independent 03-Nov-1995, [1996] 1 FLR 258

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 30

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

FollowedAbbey National plc v Moss and Others CA 1994
Mrs Moss inherited the former matrimonial home. Her daughter (L) suggested that she transfer it into their joint names to ease its transfer on her mother’s death. It was agreed the house would never be sold during Mrs Moss’s lifetime. L borrowed . .

Cited by:

CitedBank of Baroda v Dhillon and Dhillon CA 17-Oct-1997
A property had been bought in the husband’s name. The wife made financial contributions to repayment of the charge, and thereby acquired an interest in it. The property was later charged by the paper owner to the claimant, who sought possession . .
CitedRegina v Braintree District Council ex parte Halls Admn 2-Jul-1999
Where a local authority had sold a property to a tenant, and the tenant later came back to request the release from one of the covenants given on the sale, the council was free to charge an appropriate sum for that release. It was not a covenant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Land

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.78206

As Latvijas Krajbanka v Antonov: ComC 27 May 2016

The bank claimed undr Latvian Law. The defendant though aware of proceedings had failed to comply with court for dicovery, and had not attended the trial. He had been found to have exaggerated the value of a yacht given in security for a loan.
Held: The application had been dishonest and in reckless disregard of the fact that the transaction was not in the interests of the Bank. Similar findings applied to seven other very substantial advances totalling over US$30 million.

Judges:

Leggatt J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1262 (Comm), 2014 FOLIO 861 and 761

Links:

Bailii, Judiciary

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking, International

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.564921

Meridien BIAO v Bank of New York: 1997

Citations:

[1997] 1 Lloyd’s Law Rep 437

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAeolian Shipping SA v ISS Machinery Services Ltd CA 20-Jul-2001
The respondent had purchased a substantial machine. It broke down, and they sought repairs under a claimed warranty. Spares were provided, but against an undertaking to pay for them. When the spares were not paid for the ship was arrested, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.181627

Kenneth Starling v Lloyds TSB Bank plc: CA 10 Nov 1999

The setting aside of the statutory power of a mortgagor in possession to grant a lease, by the mortgage itself did not create in the lender a duty of good faith properly to consider a request from the mortgagor for permission to let the property. It was wrong to attempt to import such a duty from a very different area of law.

Judges:

29 October 1999

Citations:

Times 12-Nov-1999, Gazette 10-Nov-1999

Statutes:

Law of Property Act 1925 99

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

FollowedMedforth v Blake and others CA 26-May-1999
A receiver appointed to manage a business had duties over and above those of mere good faith. A receiver who failed to obtain discounts normally obtainable for supplies to the business might be liable for that failure. when considering the position . .

Cited by:

CitedNiru Battery Manufacturing Company, Bank Sepah Iran v Milestone Trading Limited CA 23-Oct-2003
The claimant had contracted to purchase lead from some of the defendants. There were delays in payment but when funds were made available they should have been repaid. An incorrect bill of lading was presented. The bill certified that the goods had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Land

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.89505

Barclays Bank Plc v Coleman and Others: CA 5 Jan 2000

It is still the case that a claimant, arguing for a charge to be set aside for undue influence must show some manifest and clear disadvantage arising from the charge. This may be subject to change in the future, but still applies now. A document required to be executed before an independent solicitor, but witnessed by a legal executive with the authority of his solicitor employer was properly executed and counted as having been given under such independent advice.

Judges:

Nourse LJ

Citations:

Times 05-Jan-2000, Gazette 20-Jan-2000, [2001] QB 20

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromRoyal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc HL 11-Oct-2001
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence.
Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Undue Influence, Banking

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.78195

Phillips v Bateman: 1812

A, was faced with a run on a banking house, and promised to support the bank with andpound;30,000. Note holders stopped withdrawing their money, but the bank subsequently stopped paying out.
Held: A was not liable to an action by individual holders of bank notes, under the doctrine of privity of contract.

Citations:

104 ER 1124, (1812) 16 East 356

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Banking

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.222003

Andrews v Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd: 6 Sep 2012

Austlii High Court of Australia – Banker and customer – Penalty doctrine – Consumer and commercial credit card accounts – Honour fee – Dishonour fee – Late payment fee – Non-payment fee – Over limit fee – Whether those fees penalties – Whether penalty doctrine limited to circumstances where there is breach of contract – Significance of law respecting penal bonds – Grounds for equitable intervention – Whether penalty doctrine now wholly a rule of common law.
Equity – Doctrines and remedies – Relief against penalties – Significance of law respecting penal bonds – Whether relief available only in cases of breach of contract – Whether penalty doctrine now wholly a rule of common law.
Words and phrases – ‘bond’, ‘condition’, ‘dishonour fee’, ‘exception fees’, ‘honour fee’, ‘penalty’.

Judges:

French CJ, Gummow, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell JJ

Citations:

[2012] HCA 30, (2012) 247 CLR 205, (2012) 290 ALR 595, [2012] ASC 155, (2012) 86 ALJR 1002

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedCavendish Square Holding Bv v Talal El Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis SC 4-Nov-2015
The court reconsidered the law relating to penalty clauses in contracts. The first appeal, Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, raised the issue in relation to two clauses in a substantial commercial contract. The second appeal, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Equity, Banking

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.593106

Commercial Banking Co of Sydney Ltd v Mann: PC 1961

The respondent Mann practiced as a solicitor in partnership with Richardson. They kept a ‘trust account’ in the partnership name with the Australian and New Zealand Bank in Sydney (‘ANZ’). Under the partnership agreement, all assets belonged to Mann, but cheques might be drawn on the partnership bank account by either. Mann gave the necessary authority to ANZ. Richardson used that authority to draw cheques, inserting on each after the printed word ‘Pay’, the words ‘Bank cheque favour H. Ward’ or ‘Bank cheque H. Ward;’. He also filed application forms for bank cheques in favour of H. Ward to a like amount, purporting to sign them on behalf of the firm. He took the documents to ANZ, which in each case debited the firm’s account and issued a bank draft of an equal amount in the form ‘Pay H. Ward or bearer.’ He took the cheques to the appellant bank, and cashed them over the counter. The bank paid the cheques. He was fraudulent throughout; Ward was not a client of the partnership, nor had any client authorised the payment to him of any money held in the trust account. Mann sued the appellant bank for conversion of the bank cheques, or alternatively to recover the sums received by it from ANZ bank as money had and received to his use. He succeeded before the trial judge, whose decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.
Held: The bank’s appeal succeeded. Mann never obtained any title to the cheques, and he could not obtain title by ratifying the conduct of Richardson in obtaining the cheques from ANZ bank, without at the same time ratifying the dealings in the cheques by Ward and the appellant bank. Mann’s claim for damages for conversion failed, and that his alternative claim for money had and received also failed. Where a partner in a firm wrongfully draws a cheque on the partnership account, the proceeds of the cheque are legally his.
Viscount Simonds said: ‘It is important to distinguish between what was Richardson’s authority in relation on the one hand to the A.N.Z. bank and on the other to Mann. No question arises in these proceedings between Mann and the A.N.Z. bank. It is clear that Mann could not as between himself and the bank question Richardson’s authority to draw cheques on the trust account. The position as between Mann and Richardson was different. Richardson had no authority, express or implied, from Mann either to draw cheques on the trust account or to obtain bank cheques in exchange for them except for the proper purposes of the partnership. If he exceeded those purposes, his act was unauthorised and open to challenge by Mann. It is in these circumstances that the question must be asked whether, as the judge held, the bank cheques were throughout the property of Mann. It is irrelevant to this question what was the relation between Richardson and Ward and whether the latter gave any consideration for the bank cheques that he received and at what stage Mann learned of the fraud that had been practised upon him. The proposition upon which the respondent founds his claim is simple enough: Richardson was his partner and in that capacity was able to draw upon the trust account and so to obtain from the bank its promissory notes: therefore the notes were the property of the partnership and belonged to Mann, and Richardson could not give a better title to a third party than he himself had.’

Judges:

Viscount Simonds, Lord Reid, Lord Radcliffe, Lord Tucker and Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest

Citations:

[1961] AC 1, [1960] 3 All ER 482

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedUnion Bank of Australia Ltd v McClintock PC 1922
Where a partner obtains money by drawing on a partnership bank account without authority, he alone and not the partnership obtains legal title to the money so obtained. . .

Cited by:

CitedLipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd HL 6-Jun-1991
The plaintiff firm of solicitors sought to recover money which had been stolen from them by a partner, and then gambled away with the defendant. He had purchased their gaming chips, and the plaintiff argued that these, being gambling debts, were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Company, Banking, Torts – Other

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.259437

Bank of Scotland v Singh: 17 Jun 2005

Judges:

Judge Kershaw QC

Citations:

Unreported, 17 June 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBarclays Bank Plc v Kufner ComC 10-Oct-2008
barclays_kufnerComC2008
The bank sought summary judgment under a guarantee to secure a loan to purchase a luxury yacht which was to be hired out in business. The loan had been charged against the yacht, but when the yacht was re-registered, the bank failed to re-establish . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.280080

Marfani and Co Ltd v Midland Bank Ltd: CA 1968

A rogue opened a new bank account under a false name with the help of an incorrect reference from a valued customer.
Held: When an account is fraudulently opened with the bank in the name of another person by someone pretending to be that person, the person opening the account is the customer.
The court explained the tort of conversion, with special reference to bills of exchange. Liability is strict for misappropriation of goods.
Diplock LJ: ‘It is, however, in my view, clear that the intention of the subsection and its statutory predecessors is to substitute for the absolute duty owed at common law by a banker to the true owner of a cheque not to take any steps in the ordinary course of business leading up to an including the receipt of payment of the cheque, and the crediting of the amount of the cheque to the account of his customer, in usurpation of the true owner’s title thereto a qualified duty to take reasonable care to refrain from taking any such step which he foresees is, or ought reasonably to have foreseen was, likely to cause loss or damage to the true owner.
The only respect in which this substituted statutory duty differs from a common law cause of action in negligence is that, since it takes the form of a qualified immunity from a strict liability at common law, the onus of showing that he did take such reasonable care lies upon the defendant banker. Granted good faith in the banker (the other condition of the immunity), the usual matter with respect to which the banker must take reasonable care is to satisfy himself that his own customer’s title to the cheque delivered to him for collection is not defective, i.e., that no other person is the true owner of it. Where the customer is in possession of the cheque at the time of delivery for collection and appears upon the face of it to be the ‘holder’, i.e., the payee or indorsee or the bearer, the banker is, in my view, entitled to assume that the customer is the owner of the cheque unless there are facts which are, or ought to be, known to him which would cause a reasonable banker to suspect that the customer was not the true owner.
What facts ought to be known to the banker, i.e., what inquiries he should make, and what facts are sufficient to cause him reasonably to suspect that the customer is not the true owner, must depend upon current banking practice, and change as that practice changes. Cases decided 30 years ago, when the use by the general public of banking facilities was much less widespread, may not be a reliable guide to what the duty of a careful banker in relation to inquiries, and as to facts which should give rise to suspicion, is today.
What the court has to do is to look at all the circumstances at the time of the acts complained of and to ask itself: were those circumstances such as would cause a reasonable banker possessed of such information about his customer as a reasonable banker would possess, to suspect that his customer was not the true owner of the cheque?
In all actions of the kind with which we are here concerned, the banker’s customer has in fact turned out to be a fraudulent rogue, and attention is naturally concentrated upon the duty of care which was owed by the banker to the person who has in fact turned out to be the true owner of the cheque. We are always able to be wise after the event, but the banker’s duty fell to be performed before it, and the duty which he owed to the true owner ought not to be considered in isolation. At the relevant time, the true owner was entitled to take into consideration the interests of his customer, who, be it remembered, would in all probability turn out to be honest, as most men are, and his own business interests, and to weigh those against the risk of loss or damage to the true owner of the cheque in the unlikely event that he should turn out not to be the customer himself.’

As to the practice of bankers: ‘The only evidence of the practice of bankers was given by the manager and the securities clerk of the branch in question of the defendant bank. No evidence that the general practice of other bankers differed from that adopted by the defendant bank was called by the plaintiff company, although they knew well in advance of the trial, as a result of searching interrogatories, exactly what steps the defendant bank had taken, and what inquiries they had made. It seems a reasonable inference that what the defendants did in the present case was in accordance with current banking practice. Nield J accepted that it was, and Mr Lloyd has not sought to argue the contrary. What he contends is that this court is entitled to examine that practice and to form its own opinion as to whether it does comply with the standard of care which a prudent banker should adopt. That is quite right, but I venture to think that this court should be hesitant before condemning as negligent a practice generally adopted by those engaged in banking business.’

Judges:

Diplock LJ

Citations:

[1968] 1 WLR 956, [1968] 2 All ER 573

Statutes:

Cheques Act 1957 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedCommissioners of State Savings Bank v Permewan, Wright and Co 18-Dec-1914
(High Court of Australia) The court considered the nature of negligence in a banker: ‘the test of negligence is whether the transaction of paying in any given cheque [coupled with the circumstances antecedent and present] was so out of the ordinary . .

Cited by:

CitedDextra Bank and Trust Company Limited v Bank of Jamaica PC 26-Nov-2001
(Jamaica) A cheque was drawn which was used as part a complex financial arrangement intended to purchase foreign currency to work around Jamaica’s foreign exchange control regulations. It was asserted that by presenting the cheque used in the . .
CitedArchitects of Wine Ltd v Barclays Bank Plc CA 20-Mar-2007
The bank appealed summary judgement against it for conversion of cheques. The cheques had been obtained by a fraud.
Held: The court considered the question of neglience under section 4: ‘The section 4 qualified duty does not require an . .
CitedWhite v Withers Llp and Dearle CA 27-Oct-2009
The claimant was involved in matrimonial ancillary relief proceedings. His wife was advised by the defendants, her solicitors, to remove his private papers. The claimant now sought permission to appeal against a strike out of his claim against the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Torts – Other

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.181845

Sberbank of Russia v Council: ECFI 13 Sep 2018

Restrictive Measures Adopted In View of Russia’S Actions Destabilising The Situation In Ukraine – Judgment
Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures adopted in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine – Applicant’s name included and retained in the list of entities to which the restrictive measures apply – Error of assessment – Obligation to state reasons – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Right to property – Right to carry on an economic activity

Citations:

T-732/14, [2018] EUECJ T-732/14, ECLI:EU:T:2018:541

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

International, Banking

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.622590

Kleinwort, Sons, and Co v Dunlop Rubber Co: HL 16 Jul 1907

A. was financed by B. and Co. and C. and Co., both firms of bankers, who advanced him money on the security of goods. A. sold goods to D. and Co., and instructed them to remit the price direct to B. and Co., who had a right of security over the particular goods sold. D. and Co. by mistake remitted the price to C. and Co., who received it in good faith believing that it represented a sum due to them of a similar amount. In a previous action, reported (1905) A.C. 454), the House of Lords found D. and Co. liable to pay the sum again to B. and Co. In the present action (a jury having found in fact that what had occurred had not altered C. and Co.’s position as regarded A. for the worse), held that D. and Co. were entitled to recover the money from C. and Co. as being money paid under a mistake of fact.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords James of Hereford, Robertson, and Atkinson

Citations:

[1907] UKHL 633

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Banking

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.622307

VTB Bank (Austria) v Finanzmarktaufsichtsbehorde: ECJ 7 Aug 2018

Supervision of Credit Institutions – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Approximation of laws – Directive 2013/36/EU – Articles 64, 65 and 67 – Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – Article 395(1) and (5) – Supervision of credit institutions – Supervisory powers and powers to impose penalties – Large exposure limits – Legislation of a Member State under which interest is levied where those limits are exceeded – Regulation (EU) No 468/2014 – Article 48 – Attribution of areas of competence between the European Central Bank (ECB) and national authorities – Formally initiated supervisory procedure

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2018:648, [2018] EUECJ C-52/17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.621624

North and South Wales Bank v Irvine: HL 5 Mar 1908

M was induced by the fraud of W to draw a cheque in favour of K or order. K was an existing person, and when M drew the cheque in his favour he intended that K or his indorsee should receive the money. W obtained the cheque, forged K’s indorsement, paid the cheque into his own account with the N. and S. W. Bank, and they, on Presenting it to M’s bank received payment.
Held, that K was not a ‘fictitious’ person within the meaning of section 7, sub-section 3, of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, and that accordingly the N. and S. W. Bank were liable in the amount of the cheque to M.
Held further, in an action under precisely similar circumstances between I and the bank, that the fact that W had advanced to I a sum of money only pounds 120 less than the sum in the cheque was immaterial, and that the bank had no right of set-off.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Robertson and Collins

Citations:

[1908] UKHL 986, 45 SLR 986,

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621502

Bank of Scotland v Liquidators of Hutchison Main and Co Ltd: HL 6 Feb 1914

The solicitors of a limited liability company wrote to a bank-‘We further write to say that we are authorised by the directors, and our London correspondents have our instructions, forthwith to procure from Mr Johnson a debenture or floating charge over the whole of his assets in name of this company for the amount required to secure the debt due by Mr Johnson to our clients. So soon as that debenture reaches our hands we have instructions to make it available to the Bank of Scotland as further and additional security for the repayment by our clients of their indebtedness to the bank, and it is understood in respect of the arrangements made that the bank will give to those interested in the company the benefit of the arrangements referred to in past correspondence.’ Correspondence followed as to whether an assignation or a mortgage should be given to the bank, but though the debenture in favour of the company was granted, nothing more was done before the company went into liquidation.
Held that the bank had no preferential claim on the debenture.

Judges:

Earl of Halsbury, Lord Kinnear, Lord Atkinson, and Lord Shaw

Citations:

[1914] UKHL 229 – 1, 51 SLR 229 – 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Insolvency, Banking

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.620706

Sinclair v Brougham: HL 12 Feb 1914

Where a building society had out with its powers done banking business and taken deposits from the public, held that depositors and shareholders ranked pari passu in the liquidation.
Judgment of the Court of Appeal sub nom. re Birkbeck Permanent Benefit Building Society, 1912, 2 Ch. 183, varied.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Viscount Haldane), Lords Dunedin, Atkinson, Parker, and Sumner

Citations:

[1914] UKHL 585, 52 SLR 585

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.620707

Klyuyev v Council: ECFI 11 Jul 2018

Restrictive Measures Taken In View of The Situation In Ukraine – Freezing of Funds – List of Persons – Judgment – Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Ukraine – Freezing of funds – List of persons, entities and bodies subject to the freezing of funds and economic resources – Retention of the applicant’s name on the list – Legal basis – Manifest error of assessment – Rights of defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Right to property – Right to reputation – Plea of illegality

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:433, T-240/16, [2018] EUECJ T-240/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking, International

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620026

Credit Agricole v ECB: ECFI 13 Jul 2018

Judgment – Economic and Monetary Policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 4 (1) (d) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Calculation of the leverage ratio – Refusal by the ECB to authorize the applicant to exclude from the calculation of the leverage ratio exposures meeting certain conditions – Article 429 (14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – ECB discretionary power – Errors of law – manifest error of assessment

Citations:

T-758/16, [2018] EUECJ T-758/16, ECLI:EU:T:2018:472

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620011

Confederation Nationale Du Credit Mutuel v ECB: ECFI 13 Jul 2018

Judgment – Economic and Monetary Policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 4 (1) (d) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Calculation of the leverage ratio – Refusal by the ECB to authorize the applicant to exclude from the calculation of the leverage ratio exposures meeting certain conditions – Article 429 (14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – ECB discretionary power – Errors of law – manifest error of assessment

Citations:

T-751/16, [2018] EUECJ T-751/16, ECLI:EU:T:2018:475

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620010

Banque Postale v ECB: ECFI 13 Jul 2018

Judgment
Economic and Monetary Policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 4 (1) (d) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Calculation of the leverage ratio – Refusal by the ECB to authorize the applicant to exclude from the calculation of the leverage ratio exposures meeting certain conditions – Article 429 (14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – ECB discretionary power – Errors of law – manifest error of assessment

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:477, [2018] EUECJ T-733/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619999

BNP Paribas v ECB: ECFI 13 Jul 2018

Judgment
Economic and Monetary Policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 4 (1) (d) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Calculation of the leverage ratio – Refusal by the ECB to authorize the applicant to exclude from the calculation of the leverage ratio exposures meeting certain conditions – Article 429 (14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – ECB discretionary power – Errors of law – manifest error of assessment

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:471, [2018] EUECJ T-768/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620000

BPCE v ECB: ECFI 13 Jul 2018

Judgment
Economic and Monetary Policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 4 (1) (d) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Calculation of the leverage ratio – Refusal by the ECB to authorize the applicant to exclude from the calculation of the leverage ratio exposures meeting certain conditions – Article 429 (14) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 – ECB discretionary power – Errors of law – manifest error of assessment

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:476, [2018] EUECJ T-745/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.620001

Deeley v Lloyds Bank Ltd: HL 26 Jul 1912

Where a bank holding a first mortgage over property in security for advances on a current account receives intimation of a second mortgage over the property, the priority of the bank as first mortgagee only extends to advances made before the date of the intimation, and all payments to the account after that date must be applied by the bank in reduction of the balance due to it at that date.

Citations:

[1912] UKHL 625, 50 SLR 62

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Banking

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619247

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.

Judges:

Sir Geoffrey Vos Ch, Gloster, McCombe LJJ

Citations:

[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

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

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

VQ v ECB: ECFI 3 May 2018

Economic and Monetary Policy – Prudential Supervision of Credit Institutions – Order – Application for interim measures – Economic and monetary policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Tasks conferred on the ECB by Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Powers of the ECB – Specific supervision powers – Administrative penalties – Publication – Application for suspension of operation – No urgency

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:261, [2018] EUECJ T-203/18 – CO

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 21 April 2022; Ref: scu.615566

Caisse Regionale De Credit Agricole Mutuel Alpes Provence v ECB: ECFI 24 Apr 2018

Economic and Monetary Policy – Judgment – Economic and Monetary Policy – Prudential supervision of credit institutions – Article 4 (1) (e) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 – Person effectively directing the activities of a credit institution – Article 13 (1) of Directive 2013/36 / EU and Article L. 511-13, second paragraph, of the French Monetary and Financial Code – Principle of non-cumulation of the presidency of the management body of a credit institution credit in its supervisory role with the function of Director-General in the same establishment – Article 88 (1) (e) of Directive 2013/36 and Article L. 511-58 of the French Monetary and Financial Code

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2018:219, [2018] EUECJ T-133/16

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Banking

Updated: 14 April 2022; Ref: scu.609300

Chase Manhattan Bank NA v Israel-British Bank (London) Ltd: 1981

Goulding J approved the statement in Story’s Commentaries on Equity Jurisprudence: ‘the receiving of money which consistently with conscience cannot be retained is, in equity, sufficient to raise a trust in favour of the party for whom or on whose account it was received. This is the governing principle in all such cases. And therefore, whenever any controversy arises, the true question is, not whether money has been received by a party of which he could not have compelled the payment, but whether he can now, with a safe conscience, ex aequo et bono, retain it.’

Judges:

Goulding J

Citations:

[1981] Ch 105

Cited by:

CitedBailey and Another v Angove’s Pty Ltd SC 27-Jul-2016
The defendant had agreed to act as the claimant’s agent and distributor of the claimant’s wines in the UK. It acted both as agent and also bought wines on its own account. When the defendant went into litigation the parties disputed the right of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Equity

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.568653

Neste Oy v Lloyd’s Bank Plc: ChD 1983

A shipping agent (PSL), a client of the defendant, had become insolvent. The defendant sought to combine the accounts. PSL settled on behalf of their shipowner clients bills payable to harbour authorities, pilots, fuel merchants, and other providers of goods and services. The shipowners sometimes put them in funds in advance and sometimes reimbursed them in arrears. The plaintiff shipowners claimed that the unspent balance of six payments made by them to a general account of PSL were held for them in trust. Their primary case was that the payments were subject to an implied trust to pay the money to the suppliers. This arose either by virtue of the agency relationship or as a special purpose (or Quistclose) trust.
Held: The argument was rejected. However, there was a constructive trust of the sixth payment, which had been received after the directors of PSL had concluded that their company was insolvent.
Bingham J approved as ‘in accord with the general principles of equity as applied in England’: ‘the receiving of money which consistently with conscience cannot be retained is, in equity, sufficient to raise a trust in favour of the party for whom or on whose account it was received. This is the governing principle in all such cases. And therefore, whenever any controversy arises, the true question is, not whether money has been received by a party of which he could not have compelled the payment, but whether he can now, with a safe conscience, ex aequo et bono, retain it.’ from Story’s Commentaries on Equity Jurisprudence, 2nd ed.
He applied this to the facts of the case saying: ‘Given the situation of PSL when the last payment was received, any reasonable and honest directors of that company (or the actual directors had they known of it) would, I feel sure, have arranged for the repayment of that sum to the plaintiff’s without hesitation or delay. It would have seemed little short of sharp practice for PSL to take any benefit from the payment, and it would have seemed contrary to any ordinary notion of fairness that the general body of creditors should profit from the accident of a payment made at a time when there was bound to be a total failure of consideration. Of course it is true that insolvency always causes loss and perfect fairness is unattainable. The bank, and other creditors, have their legitimate claims. It nonetheless seems to me that at the time of its receipt PSL could not in good conscience retain this payment and that accordingly a constructive trust is to be inferred.’

Judges:

Bingham J

Citations:

[1983] 2 Lloyds Rep 658

Citing:

CitedBarclays Bank Ltd v Quistclose Investments Ltd; etc HL 31-Oct-1968
R Ltd were in serious financial difficulties. The company’s overdraft with the appellant bank was almost twice its permitted limit. The company sought a loan of 1 million pounds from a financier, who was willing to lend the company that sum provided . .

Cited by:

Not justifiedBailey and Another v Angove’s Pty Ltd SC 27-Jul-2016
The defendant had agreed to act as the claimant’s agent and distributor of the claimant’s wines in the UK. It acted both as agent and also bought wines on its own account. When the defendant went into litigation the parties disputed the right of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Agency, Banking

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.568652

Re Armagh Shoes Ltd: 1984

Citations:

[1984] BCLC 405

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedSiebe Gorman and Co Ltd v Barclays Bank Ltd ChD 1979
It was possible to create a fixed charge over present and future book debts and on its true construction, the debenture granted to Barclays Bank Ltd in this case had done so. If the chargor of book debts, having collected the book debts, ‘[had] had . .

Cited by:

DoubtedNational Westminster Bank Plc v Spectrum Plus Ltd and others ChD 15-Jan-2004
The company granted a debenture to the claimant purporting to secure its book debts. The company went into liquidation. The liquidator challenged the bank’s charge.
Held: Siebe was wrongly decided. The charge was ineffective over the book . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.191957

Struggles and others v Lloyds TSB plc: TCC 10 Feb 2000

A mineral quarry was repossessed under a mortgage and attempts were made to sell it. A claim that it had been sold at an undervalue was defeated. The valuation of such an asset was to make allowance for capitalisation of the income stream from mineral royalties. The sale of the property had been delayed long enough to allow a proper valuation, and a further sale would have put the bank at risk of other allegations. The bank had obtained the best price reasonably obtainable.

Citations:

Gazette 10-Feb-2000

Land, Banking

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.89596

Pharaon and Others v Bank of Credit and Commerce International Sa, Price Waterhouse Intervening; Price Waterhouse v Bank of Credit and Commerce Etc: ChD 17 Aug 1998

A banker’s duty of confidentiality to its clients can be overridden where fraud is alleged and a document is required even to support private foreign litigation. Disclosure of fraud changed balance of the public interest.

Citations:

Times 17-Aug-1998

Banking

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84695

Mumford v Bank of Scotland; Smith v Same: OHCS 4 Aug 1994

Bank has no duty in Scotland to wife of borrower securing debt on house.

Citations:

Times 04-Aug-1994

Citing:

Appealed toMumford v Bank of Scotland IHCS 29-Sep-1995
There was no undue influence presumption to fix a bank with notice of husband’s misrepresentation of the position to wife giving security. . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromMumford v Bank of Scotland IHCS 29-Sep-1995
There was no undue influence presumption to fix a bank with notice of husband’s misrepresentation of the position to wife giving security. . .
Appeal fromSmith v Governor and Company of The Bank of Scotland HL 6-Feb-1997
A bank which did not warn its customer of the of risks of a loan and of the need for independent advice was bound by misrepresentations made by customer. The House referred to ‘the broad principle in the field of contract law of fair dealing in good . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84124

National Westminster Bank Plc v Devon County Council, Devon County Council v Abbey National Plc: QBD 16 Jul 1993

A lender may use an initial fixed rate as the basis for an APR quotation. The APR on a 25 year mortgage may be calculated on the initial fixed rate not the subsequent variable one.

Citations:

Independent 25-Aug-1993, Times 16-Jul-1993

Statutes:

Consumer Credit Act 1974 46

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84213

Morris v Banque Arab et Internationale D’Investissment SA (No 2): ChD 26 Oct 2000

For an order to be made under the section, and a contribution to the shortfall on insolvency made, it was necessary to show that the person against whom the order was sought had in some way participated in the fraudulent activity. It was not necessary to show that there had been any direct involvement in the management or carrying on of the business.

Citations:

Times 26-Oct-2000, Gazette 02-Nov-2000

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 213 (2)

Citing:

See AlsoMorris v Banque Arab et Internationale d’Investissement ChD 2000
The parties had exchanged lists of documents but one side objected to inspection of a number of them on the ground that it would put them in breach of French law.
Held: There was discretion to be exercised. Neuberger J ordered inspection . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Banking

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83853

Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd v Sutton London Borough Council: QBD 23 Mar 1995

A guarantee of loan to a non-registered housing association was ultra vires.

Citations:

Times 23-Mar-1995

Statutes:

Local Government Act 1972

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromLondon Borough of Sutton v Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Sutton London Borough of Sutton v Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd Wellesley Housing Association Ltd CA 24-Oct-1996
The Housing Associations Act 1985 empowered a local authority to give guarantees in relation to registered housing associations. A local authority guaranteed a bank loan for an unregistered housing association.
Held: A Local Authority had no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Banking

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83829

Mercedes Benz Finance Ltd v Clydesdale: OHCS 16 Sep 1996

The creditor finance company complained that the customer had paid money into its account with the bank, in order to discharge its obligations by direct debit payments, but that the bank had refused to make the payments. The claimant argued that the direct debit mandate was a mandate in rem suam, and was not dependant upon a credit balance to be maintained.
Held: The respective rights as between a banker and his customer are not affected by direct debit instructions. The instruction to pay remained that of the account holder. The creditor was in the same position as was the payee on a cheque, namely that it was a prerequisitie of an assignative effect that the account should crry sufficient funds. Though there were no relevant averments of trust or of a fiduciary relationship, the bank’s knowledgeof the specific reason for the lodgment of the funds to meet a specific obligation might be enough to require proof to be heard on the claim for unjust enrichment.

Judges:

Lord Penrose

Citations:

Times 16-Sep-1996, 1996 SCLR 1005

Citing:

CitedBritish Motor Trade Association v Gray 1951
The test for an allegation of wrongful interference in a contract required something more than a failure to act. . .
CitedSutherland v Royal Bank of Scotland 1996
. .
CitedClark Taylor and Company v Quality Site Development (Edinburgh) Limited 1981
It was claimed that a trust had come into being in circumstances where the alleged truster and the alleged trustee were the same person.
Held: It was competent for the claimant to be both truster and trustee. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Scotland

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83646

Matthew v T M Sutton Ltd: ChD 23 Jun 1994

A pawnbroker was liable to pay interest on excess funds recovered in its capacity as trustee. The court ordered an enquiry: ‘. . . as to what use was made by the defendant of the proceeds of sale and what return was obtained by him on those monies in order to determine the rate of interest to be applied.’

Judges:

Chadwick J

Citations:

Independent 23-Jun-1994, Times 22-Jun-1994

Cited by:

CitedPenelope Wilson v Howard (Pawnbrokers) Ltd CA 4-Feb-2005
The customer challenged a series of pawn agreements. The broker appealed the finding that the contracts were invalid, on the basis that the judgment had created an unjust enrichment.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘in pawn transactions the debtor is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Banking

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83479

Levett and Others v Barclays Bank Plc: QBD 27 Jan 1995

A contract was set aside where the plaintiff who had put up treasury stock as security, was not told of arrangements between the debtor and the bank whereby the security would be used to repay the loan. A creditor must reveal the disadvantageous nature of a loan to a proposed surety: ‘The creditor is under a duty to the surety to disclose to the surety contractual arrangements made between the principal debtor and the creditor which both, (a) make the terms of the principal contract something different from those which the surety might naturally expect and, (b) materially affect the degree of the surety’s responsibility.’

Judges:

Michael Burton QC

Citations:

Times 27-Jan-1995, [1995] 1 WLR 1260, [1995] 2 All ER 615

Cited by:

HelpfulLloyds TSB Bank Plc v Shorney and Another CA 20-Jul-2001
The defendant had signed a guarantee and supporting charge to support her husband’s business debts. It has been expressly limited to andpound;150,000. Without prior notification, or seeking her consent, the bank extended the loan. When it later . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Banking

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83032

In Re Westmaze Ltd (In Administrative Receivership): ChD 15 May 1998

Westmaze were mechanical engineers. They gave a charge to secure borrowings, which described itself as a fixed charge.
Held: A Charge over a company’s book and trading assets was in fact floating even though described as a fixed charge unless it could be shown clearly that the creditor took the right to control the assets charged in the ordinary course of business.

Judges:

David Oliver QC

Citations:

Times 15-Jul-1998

Citing:

CitedRoyal Trust v National Westminster Bank plc CA 1996
A charge was given over the benefits of hire purchase and leasing agreements. The terms of the charge entitled the chargee to require payments under the agreements to be paid into a special account, but the chargee never in fact did so and the . .
CitedIn re Yorkshire Woolcombers Association Ltd ChD 1903
Farwell J said: ‘A charge on all book debts which may now be, or at any time hereafter become charged or assigned, leaving the mortgagor or assignor free to deal with them as he pleases until the mortgagee or assignee intervenes, is not a specific . .
CitedIn re Brightlife Ltd ChD 1987
Parties contractual freedom to be respected
A clause in a debenture gave a charge which provided that the chargor should not: ‘deal with its book or other debts or securities for money otherwise than in the ordinary course of getting in and realising the same which expression shall not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82286

In Re ASRS Establishment Ltd (In Administrative Receivership and Liquidation): ChD 17 Nov 1999

Although the parties should be free to make the agreement they wanted to, and the court should listen, that would not mean that assets which were incapable of being made subject to a fixed charge could be made so by the joint intention of the parties.

Citations:

Times 17-Nov-1999

Cited by:

CitedNational Westminster Bank Plc v Spectrum Plus Ltd; In re Spectrum Plus CA 26-May-2004
The court was asked whether a charge given over book debts in a debenture was floating or fixed.
Held: Since the charge asserted some control over receipt of the payments, it was a fixed charge. Upon payment into the account, title to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Insolvency

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81699

Hollicourt (Contracts) Ltd (In Liquidation) v Bank of Ireland: ChD 17 Dec 1999

A company’s account was in credit at all times, but was, unknown to the bank, in winding up proceedings. The bank continued to honour cheques, and was found to have been making dispositions of the company’s assets under the section. Accordingly the payments were void and ineffective from the date of the commencement of the winding up.

Citations:

Times 30-Nov-1999, Gazette 17-Dec-1999

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 127

Citing:

Appealed toBank of Ireland v Hollicourt (Contracts) Limited CA 20-Oct-2000
A bank continued to pay on cheques presented to it against the company’s bank account even after the presentation of a petition for bankruptcy. The liquidator sought recovery of the amounts paid from the bank as well as the payees. It was held that . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromBank of Ireland v Hollicourt (Contracts) Limited CA 20-Oct-2000
A bank continued to pay on cheques presented to it against the company’s bank account even after the presentation of a petition for bankruptcy. The liquidator sought recovery of the amounts paid from the bank as well as the payees. It was held that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Insolvency, Banking

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81446

HSBC Bank Plc v Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Uk) Ltd: ChD 11 Jun 2001

Where the draftsman of a contract appeared to have misused a word the court could depart from the dictionary meanings even if there was no ambiguity. This must first become apparent from the surrounding circumstances before the court could accept that it was to be driven to construe the contract in this way.

Citations:

Times 11-Jun-2001

Insurance, Banking, Contract

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81509

Halifax Mortgage Services Ltd (Formerly BNP Mortgages Ltd) v Stepsky and Another: ChD 27 Jun 1995

The knowledge of a solicitor, acting for both the borrower and the lender, of the lay clients intentions as regards the future use of the loan, is not to be imputed to the lender, even though the solicitor acts for both parties, and is the lender’s agent.

Judges:

Edward Nugee QC

Citations:

Ind Summary 24-Jul-1995, Times 27-Jun-1995, Gazette 13-Jul-1995, [1996] Ch 1

Cited by:

Appeal fromHalifax Mortgage Services Ltd (Formerly BNP Mortgages Ltd) v Stepsky and Another CA 1-Dec-1995
The knowledge of a solicitor, acting for both the borrower and the lender, of the lay clients intentions as regards the future use of the loan, is not to be imputed to the lender, even though the solicitor acts for both parties, and is the lender’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Legal Professions, Banking

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81153

Hampton v Minns: ChD 17 May 2001

The parties were each sureties for a debt to their bank from their company. The bank recovered the company’s debt from one surety, who in turn sought a contribution of half from the other. The respondent asserted that the claim was statute barred, because in this case it was a claim under a guarantee for which the limitation period was two years. The claimant succeeded, on the basis that the claim was in debt, because of the particular agreement. On its true construction the agreement between the parties created a debt, and the right to a contribution did not arise under the 1978 Act.

Citations:

Gazette 17-May-2001

Statutes:

Civil Liability (Contributions) Act 1978 1, Limitation Act 1980 10

Limitation, Banking

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81213

Global Financial Recoveries Ltd v Jones: ChD 13 Jan 2000

The defendant entered into a mortgage loan. The property was repossessed and he faced an action for recovery of the shortfall. It was argued that the claim was out of time after six years. The court held that the debt remained a specialty debt and the twelve year period applied, but nevertheless, the actual claimant claimed under an assignment which had assigned only the personal element of the debt, but not the benefit of the covenant within the mortgage deed. An assignment of the debt alone operated to assign that debt, and not the right given under the mortgage, and so a claim under the assignment was limited as under contract.

Citations:

Gazette 13-Jan-2000, Times 23-Feb-2000, [2000] BPIR 1029

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980

Cited by:

CitedWest Bromwich Building Society v Wilkinson HL 30-Jun-2005
The Society had taken possession of a property in 1989. It located the defendants many years later and sought payment of the excess after deduction of the proceeds of sale, and for interest. The borrowers claimed the debt was expired by limitation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Land, Banking, Limitation

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.80875