Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2003] All ER (D) 345 (May)
Neutral Citation: [2003] EWHC 1113 (Comm)
Court: Commercial Court
Judge:

Gross J

Representation William Blair QC and David Quest (instructed by DG Solicitors) for the first defendant.
  Fidelis Oditah (instructed by Squire Sanders & Dempsey) for the second defendant.
Judgment Dates: 23 May 2003

Catchwords

Banking - Business of banking - Payment of cheques - English bank acting as paying bank and agent for collection for foreign bank - Cheque stolen - Both banks settling claimant's action - English bank seeking indemnity from foreign bank - Liability for stolen cheque.

The Case

In giving judgment for the first defendant bank against the second defendant bank in contribution proceedings following the honouring of a stolen cheque (the payee of which was the claimant), the court held that Middle Temple v Lloyds Bank had not been wrongly decided nor had it been decided per incuriam.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.