網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

Action against Bankers for Dishonouring Customer's Cheque,

setting out a special undertaking that it should be paid. Bankers

1. The plaintiff carries on business as a wine merchant at dishonouring cheque N., and the defendants are a firm of bankers having a bank which they there, and were and had for a long time previous to the date undertook mentioned in the next paragraph, been the bankers of the to honour. plaintiff.

2. On or about the 9th day of February, 1876, the plaintiff delivered to the defendants a sum of £120 98. 8d., on the terms that a sum of £96 out of the same should be specially applied by the defendants to honouring a cheque for that amount which the plaintiff was about to draw in favour of Messrs. M., McK, & Co. ; and a clerk of the defendant's accepted the said sum of £120 9s. 8d. on behalf of the defendants on the said terms, and promised on their behalf that the said sum of £96 should be by them held for the purpose of honouring the said cheque, and should be applied thereto, and not otherwise.

3. The said cheque was duly presented to the defendants for payment on or about February 13th, 1876, but the defendants refused to honour the same, and returned it with the indorsement “Not provided for,” although they held at the time the money specially provided to meet the said cheque.

4. The defendants and their manager, Mr. T. L. A., were aware of the circumstances under which the said sum of £120 98. 8d. had been paid to them, and the terms upon which it had been received by them at the time they so dishonoured the said cheque as aforesaid, and they had been aware of them for some considerable time previously, but no intimation was given by them to the plaintiff of any intention on their part to dishonour the said cheque, nor did the plaintiff know that they had so dishonoured it till some time after they had done so, at which time the said cheque had been returned to Messrs. M., McK. & Co. by the Nottingham Joint-Stock Bank, through whom it was presented for payment.

5. In consequence of the above-mentioned dishonour of his cheque by the defendants, the plaintiff has suffered great damage, and his credit has been greatly injured thereby.

The plaintiff claims £3000.

Statement of Defence. 1. The defendants deny all and every the allegations in the Bankers 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th paragraphs of the statement of claim dishonour

ing a respectively contained.

cheque. 2. The defendants admit that on the 8th day of February, Defence. 1876, the plaintiff paid into the defendants' bank the sum of £76 18. in cash, and that on the same occasion he presented to the defendants at their said bank for discount two bills of exchange, one for £34 13s. and the other for £10 58. The defendants discounted the said two bills of exchange for the plaintiff, and the aggregate amount paid or allowed by the defendants to the plaintiff in respect of the said two bills of exchange on the discounting thereof was the sum of £44 78. 4d.

3. The transaction between the plaintiff and the defendants in regard to the said two sums of £76 18. and £44 78. 4d. in the 2nd paragraph mentioned was as follows : Each of the said sums was on the said 8th of February, 1876, paid by the plaintiff into the hands of the defendants as the bankers of the plaintiff in the usual way to the general credit of the banking account then kept by the plaintiff with the defendants, and upon which the plaintiff was then indebted to the defendants in a sum of £2573 11s., besides a sum of about £130 then due for interest and commission on the plaintiff's said banking account. The plaintiff at the time when he paid in the said sums respectively gave no direction whatever in regard to the application of the said sums, or any part thereof, and the defendants on the said 8th day of February, 1876, placed the said sums of £76 1s. and £44 78. 4d. respectively to the general credit of the plaintiff's said banking account, and appropriated the same in reduction and part payment to the defendants of the said sum then due from the plaintiff to the defendants as aforesaid.

4. The defendants deny that the said hereinbefore mentioned sums of £76 1s. and £44 78. 4d., or any part thereof, were by the plaintiff paid to the defendants, or accepted by the defendants, upon the terms that a sum of £96 out of the same should be specially applied by the defendants to the honouring of a cheque for that amount which the plaintiff was about to draw or did draw, in favour of Messrs. M., McK. & Co.

Bankers

5. The defendants admit that on the 12th of February, 1876 dishonour

(and not the 13th of February as in the statement of claim ing a cheque. alleged), a cheque of the plaintiff's in favour of Messrs. M., Defence. McK. & Co. for £96 was presented to the defendants for pay

ment, and that the defendants refused to honour the same, and returned it with the indorsement "not provided for.” The said presentment of the said cheque for payment was the first knowledge the defendants had of the said cheque having been drawn, and at the time of the said presentment of the said cheque the plaintiff's banking account with the defendants was very largely in debt, and the plaintiff was indebted to the defendants thereon in a sum exceeding £2500.

6. After the said 8th of February, 1876, and until the 14th of March, 1876, the plaintiff continued to keep his banking account with the defendants, and on the said 14th of March, 1876, the plaintiff paid to the defendants £2624 58. 4d., being the balance which then remained due from him to the defen

dants upon the said banking account after crediting the plainDefence of tiff with the said sums of £76 1s. and £44 78. 4d., as in the ratification by subse

3rd paragraph mentioned, and the defendants thereupon, at quent the request of the plaintiff, gave up certain securities which conduct.

they held for securing a portion of the plaintiff's said banking account. The defendants say that if any ratification were necessary, the plaintiff thereby ratified, and adopted the mode in which they had dealt with the said sums of £76 1s. and £44 78. 4d., as in the 3rd paragraph mentioned.

And by way of set-off and counter-claim the defendants say:

1. That between the months of April and August, 1876, the defendants advanced and lent to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff borrowed and received from the defendants sums of money amounting, along with the agreed rate of interest, in the whole to the sum of £1705. Full particulars of the same have been delivered to the plaintiff.

2. All things have happened and times elapsed necessary to entitle the defendants to be paid the said sum of £1705, yet the plaintiff has not paid the same.

The defendants claim £1705.

Action by Bankers to recover the Amount of a Cheque paid

by Mistake. 1. The plaintiff is a public officer of the C. and C. Banking Action by Company, entitled by Act of Parliament to sue in the name of

bankers

to recover their public officer.

money paid 2. The C. and C. Banking Company has its principal place by mistake. of business at C., but it also has branches at P., at A., and at other places.

3. These branches are quite independent of one another and of the central bank at C., and are, in fact, separate banks with separate customers, and separate accounts and books.

4. On the 24th April, 1876, one J. W. delivered to the defendant a cheque on the said A. branch, where he had an account. The following is a copy of such cheque and of the indorsements on it :

A“No. —

“(C_) 24th April, 1876. “The C. and C. Banking Company.

“Pay to Mr. J—— or order three hundred and ninetytwo pounds. « £392 0s. Od.

“J-W “ London Agents : L. and W. Bank, C. D.”

Indorsed “J-J"

5. On the 25th April, 1876, the defendant presented the said cheque to the said P. branch, and requested the manager of the said branch to cash the said cheque.

6. The manager of the said P. branch knew nothing about W. and the state of his accounts with the A. branch.

7. The manager of the said P. branch cashed the said cheque on the credit of the defendant and as a matter of favour to him, and not otherwise, and in cashing the said cheque the said manager did not pay the said cheque, nor had he any intention of doing so.

8. The said P. branch forwarded the cheque in due time to the A. branch, who returned the said cheque to them dishonoured.

9. The said W. had overdrawn his account, and the said A. branch were justified in refusing to pay the same.

Action by bankers to recover money paid by mistake.

10. The plaintiff claims :-
£392 and interest thereon from April 24th till judgment, as

money lent and advanced and as money received by
the defendant for the use of the plaintiff, the con-
sideration for the same having failed.

Defence.

Statement of Defence. 1. The defendant does not admit the allegations in the 3rd paragraph of the statement of claim.

2. The defendant admits that the said J. W. delivered to the defendant on April 24th a cheque on the C. and C. Banking Company, and that the said cheque was in the words and figures set out in the 4th paragraph. The defendant does not admit that the said cheque was drawn on the A. branch solely, but refers to the said cheque, and submits that the same was drawn on the said C. and C. Banking Company generally.

3. The said cheque was delivered to the defendant at P., on the said 24th April, after banking hours, and the defendant presented the same on the 25th April at the said branch, as and being a branch of the said C. and C. Banking Company, on which the said cheque was drawn for payment in the ordinary course, and the same was thereupon paid. Save as aforesaid the defendant denies the allegations in the 5th and 7th paragraphs respectively.

4. The defendant does not admit the allegations in the 6th paragraph.

5. The defendant kept no account with the said banking company, and was not personally known to the manager of the P. branch by whom the said cheque was paid. The said cheque was voluntarily paid by the said P. branch to the defendant, and was not cashed on the credit of or as a favour to the defendant.

6. The defendant does not admit the allegations in the 8th and 9th paragraphs of the statement of claim.

7. On the 26th of April the said J. W. paid to the manager of the A. branch of the said banking company (who was the agent thereof for the purpose of receiving such payment) a large sum of money, to wit, £2466 188. 8d., for the express purpose of meeting and providing for various cheques drawn by the said J. W. on the said banking company, including the cheque referred to in the statement of claim, and the said

« 上一頁繼續 »