Philipp v Barclays Bank UK PLC
[2023] UKSC 25
CCP Graduate School Limited v National Westminster Bank Plc & Anor
14 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 581 (KB)
High Court
A company's money was stolen through online banking fraud. The court said the banks weren't directly liable for following the fraudulent instructions, but there's still a question of whether they should have done more to get the money back after discovering the fraud. Some parts of the case were dismissed because they were brought too late.
Key Facts
- •CCP Graduate School Limited (Claimant) was victim of an authorised push payment (APP) fraud.
- •£415,909.67 was fraudulently transferred from Claimant's NatWest account to a Santander account.
- •Claimant alleges breach of duty by NatWest (First Defendant) and Santander (Second Defendant).
- •Claim against NatWest is based on alleged Quincecare duty and a 'retrieval duty'.
- •Claim against Santander is based on alleged duty of care to prevent and retrieve the fraudulently transferred funds.
Legal Principles
Summary judgment should be granted only if the claimant has no real prospect of success.
CPR 24.3, Easyair v Opal Telecom Ltd [2009] EWHC 339 Ch
A statement of case can be struck out if it discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing a claim.
CPR 3.4(2)(a), Price Meats Ltd v Barclays Bank Plc [2000] 2 All ER (Comm) 346
Limitation Act 1980, sections 2 and 5, and section 32(1)(c) regarding extension of limitation period for mistake.
Limitation Act 1980
Barclays Bank plc v Quincecare Ltd [1992] 4 All ER 363 and Philipp v Barclays Bank plc [2023] UKSC 25 concerning Quincecare duty.
Barclays Bank plc v Quincecare Ltd [1992] 4 All ER 363; Philipp v Barclays Bank plc [2023] UKSC 25
CPR 17.4 regarding amendment of statement of case after limitation period has expired.
CPR 17.4
Principles for determining whether an amendment introduces a new cause of action (Chandra v Brooke North).
Chandra v Brooke North (a firm) [2013] EWCA Civ 1559
Duty of care owed by a bank to its customer does not extend to third parties (Royal Bank of Scotland International Ltd v JP SPC 4).
Royal Bank of Scotland International Ltd v JP SPC 4 [2022] UKPC 18
Principles concerning assumption of responsibility in negligence (HXA v Surrey CC).
HXA v Surrey CC [2024] 1 WLR 335
Outcomes
Claim against First Defendant (NatWest) struck out.
Statute-barred and no Quincecare duty; payment instructions were unequivocally authorised.
Claimant's application to amend claim against First Defendant rejected.
Proposed amendment introduces a new cause of action outside the limitation period and does not arise from the same facts.
Claim against Second Defendant (Santander) partially struck out.
Claims relating to actions before 18 October 2016 are statute-barred; no Quincecare duty.
Claim against Second Defendant for a 'retrieval duty' allowed to proceed.
Uncertainty remains about whether such a duty exists; further investigation needed.