header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Don’t bank on evading liability for fraud

07 October 2022
Issue: 7997 / Categories: Legal News , Banking , Fraud , Financial services litigation
printer mail-detail
96616
You are the victim of fraud—how likely are you to succeed in a claim against your fraudster’s bank? In this week’s NLJ, David McIlroy, barrister at Forum Chambers, and Jon Felce, partner, and Rosie Wild, senior associate, at Cooke, Young & Keidan, address this question.

They look at the scope of the Quincecare duty, consider caselaw on banking claims and explain why banks remain vulnerable to claims from fraud victims. Moreover, with fraudsters upping their game and frauds increasing amid difficult economic times, banks should ensure they don’t let their guard down.

McIlroy, Felce & Wild conclude: ‘Financial institutions should not bank on evading liability in fraud cases.’ 

Read the article in full here

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll