header-logo header-logo

Banking

04 October 2013
Issue: 7578 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Tidal Energy Ltd v Bank of Scotland Plc [2013] EWHC 2780 (QB), [2013] All ER (D) 214 (Sep)

The proceedings concerned an instruction to pay a sum of money to the beneficiary by CHAPS transfer to the account number and sort code specified. Although the identity of the beneficiary was important to the claimant, the evidence was that CHAPS did not operate in such a way that the beneficiary’s name formed part of the identifier which determined the destination of the payment. The reason was a practical one; the volume of transactions conducted through CHAPS each business day meant that a process of manual checking prevented payments being accomplished within the short time scale that was the hallmark of CHAPS. There was no requirement in the CHAPS rules that the beneficiary’s name be included, and in practice CHAPS transfers were processed without reference to it. The evidence was unequivocal that the identity of the beneficiary was irrelevant to the way in which the payment was processed. It was the destination account number and sort code that mattered. The

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll