Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 21 FEBRUARY 2023

Liquidators Beware: An Alternative To Quincecare

Conyers
Conyers
Contributor
Conyers

Conyers

For over 25 years Conyers’ London office has provided time-zone sensitive advice and support to our...

View firm profile
Explore more from Conyers

The Quincecare duty has become a popular tool for companies (or their liquidators) to claim against banks for funds misappropriated on wrongful payment instructions.

Hong KongLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The Quincecare duty has become a popular tool for companies (or their liquidators) to claim against banks for funds misappropriated on wrongful payment instructions. It requires a bank to refrain from executing a payment order if and for so long as it was put on inquiry by having reasonable grounds for believing that the order was an attempt to misappropriate funds. The duty was established in Barclays Bank plc v Quincecare Ltd1 and endorsed by the UK Supreme Court ("UKSC") in Singularis Holdings Ltd (in liquidation) v Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd2 .

In 2022 and 2023, the UKSC and Privy Council delivered judgments and heard appeal in respect of the scope of the Quincecare duty. In JP SPC 4 v Royal Bank of Scotland International Ltd3 , the Privy Council confirmed that the Quincecare duty is limited to protecting the bank's customer and does not extend to a beneficial owner of the monies in the customer's account. In Stanford International Bank Ltd (in

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from