Collecting banker, Business Law and Ethics

Collecting Banker

Furthermore a collecting banker is protected through the following provisions: like;

(i)Bills of Exchange or Swap Act.

 with S.82 (1) provides such a banker in good faith and without negligence take delivery of payment for a customer such of a cheque crossed usually or specially to himself, and such the customer has like no title or a defective title thereto, such the banker shall not invite any liability such to the true owner of the cheque through reason merely of having inward such payment there.

(ii)The Cheques Act, S.32 (2).

 in Capital and Counties Bank Limited (ltd) v Gordon such the legal conception of the collecting banker was like of a mere conduit pipe so, receiving the cheque from that customer and after, and although not till then, since placing it to the customer's credit, through exercising function strictly analoguous such to those of a clerk of such the customer sent to a bank to cash an unlock cheque for his employer also.

Conversely in that case the House of Lords held as like the bank had not acted that conduit pipe, such had not received payment about the customer although for itself and so lost the protection is of with S.82 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, although it had credited the customer about the face value like cash on receipt about collection and before clearing.

(iii)The Cheques Act 1968 S.4


Further unless the banker can bring himself during the conditions formulated through the section, such he is left with his common law like liability for conversion or such money had and received, in the event of the person from that whom he takes the cheque in favour of collection having like no title or as a defective title thereto there.  in Turner v London and Provincial Bank Limited (ltd)(1903) thus evidence was admitted, such proof of negligence, the customer had prearranged a reference on opening such the account and this was not follow awake there.

Conversely in Ladbroke & Company v Todd such the bank was held negligent hence they did not make enquiries related a proposing customer. this was described like an ordinary precaution other such banks took so—further bankers or bank officials having like given evidence such they made enquiries in such cases merely.

Posted Date: 2/2/2013 7:58:56 AM | Location : United States







Related Discussions:- Collecting banker, Assignment Help, Ask Question on Collecting banker, Get Answer, Expert's Help, Collecting banker Discussions

Write discussion on Collecting banker
Your posts are moderated
Related Questions
Objects Clause: Reasons for Stating Objects  Section 5 (1) (c) requires the memorandum of association to state the objects of the company. The section does not however indi

Q. Cross agency actions - addressing phoenix activity? the ASIC, ATO and FWO all have responsibilities in investigating and monitoring elements of phoenix activity. This means

Judicial elucidation of Acts: In fact the other points to be noted in relation to judicial elucidation of Acts are as follows: like; (a)   There is no clause of an Act is t

State the third approach to antitrust agency A third approach to antitrust agency interaction is the bilateral cooperation and coordination theory. This model for how an agency

Determine the example of a relational contract A characteristic macro example of a relational contract with a strong lock-in effect is membership of a currency community. Self-

Humungus Retailing Co is a large retailing organization that has expanded rapidly over the last 2 years. It now has some 50 high street outlets each employing a small core of ful

CREDITORS' VOLUNTARY WINDING UP: If no declaration of solvency is made and delivered to the registrar, the liquidation process is a creditors' voluntary winding up even if i

Q. Evaluate nature of phoenix activity? The literature on phoenix activity and the stakeholders consulted in this project emphasised that phoenix activity has evolved significa

The Doctrine of 'Ultra Vires':                          The doctrine of ultra vires is a legal rule that was articulated by the House of Lords in the case of Ashbury Rail, Car

Humble, a local high school student, wished to buy a moped. He intended to use it to get to and from school which was 3kms away. He also had a part-time job involving some travelli