Push Payment Fraud: Singularis v Daiwa – Case Analysis – Forum Chambers

Posted November 19th, 2019 in banking, contracts, fiduciary duty, fraud, news by sally

‘In Barclays Bank plc v Quincecare Ltd [1992] 4 All ER, Steyn J held that it was an implied term of the contract between a bank and a customer that the bank would use reasonable care and skill in and about executing the customer’s order. This term would be breached if the bank executed the order knowing it to be dishonestly given, or shut its eyes to the obvious fact of the dishonesty, or acted recklessly in failing to make such enquiries as an honest and reasonable man would make. In order to comply with that term, the bank should refrain from executing a customer’s order if and for so long as it was put on inquiry by having reasonable grounds for believing that the order was an attempt to misappropriate funds.’

Full Story

Forum Chambers, 19th November 2019

Source: www.forumchambers.com