:: In Akanle V Reginam, the court noted that “banker” refers to the company licenced to carry on banking business.
:: Section dos Expenses out of Change Work 1954 describes an effective banker because the a body regarding people whether or not integrated or perhaps not just who continue the firm regarding banking. It meaning is actually faulty since the Part 2 of one’s Financial institutions and Most other Creditors Work helps it be a condition precedent to possess people carrying on banking organization become incorporated.
:: By Part dos of the Research Work, one, relationship or providers carrying on the organization out-of banking. Equivalent meaning given by Section 41(1) of your own Financial Decree.
The new conviction of your director to have giving unlawful financing was quashed on to the ground that banker rather than the movie director need to possess started prosecuted given that banker customers relationship try one to of borrower-creditor
:: A financial team could have been defined inside the Point 66 BOFIA because the organization off getting monies… giving fund… greeting from loans, costs, cheques, purchase and you may product sales out of securities… others as minister will get specify.
Ergo, an excellent banker means a buddies that has been integrated and you can subscribed to continue banking team. E.grams. Stanbic IBTC, GTB, UBA etc.
The brand new judge kept that banker-buyers dating try between A while the bank in spite of your account is actually open in B’s term as the lender only knew A good
:: Inside typical terminology, he could be considered a man buying the products or and their the expertise of some other. It’s yet not important to be aware of the strict court meaning of a buyers so you’re able to decipher whom the bank legally owes an obligation.
:: In Ladbroke and Co V Todd, the court held that to qualify as a customer, one must have an account with the bank. Same position was followed in Commissioners of Taxation V English Scottish and Australian Bank, where it was held that duration was irrelevant considering there is certainly an account to the financial. In Woods V Martins Bank, the court noted that a finalised agreement to open an account could suffice notwithstanding that no actual deposit has been made. In Robinson V Midland Bank, where A opened an account in B’s name. In Great Western Railway Company V London and County Banking Co, one Huggins had been cashing cheques Rockford escort over the counter at the defendant bank for almost 20 years. The court held that since Huggins had no account with the bank, he was not a customer. Similarly, in Ademiluyi and Lamuye V ACB, A and B (prominent members of a ruling party; NCNC) opened an account with ACB. ACB believed that the account was opened on behalf of NCNC whom they regarded as their customer. “A” sought to cash money from the account but NCNC countermanded the cheque. The court held that the countermand by NCNC was ineffective because the banker-customer relationship existed only between ACBank and AandB who were the account holders.
A SHIFT IN POSITION: The cases of Hedley Byrne Co V Heller and Partners and Agbonmagbe Bank V CFAO Ltd the courts drawing from the decision of Donoghue V Stevenson, have held that a bank can be liable in negligence to a person notwithstanding that he does not have an account with the bank so long as it is reasonably foreseeable that they shall be affected by the bank’s negligence.
To conclude, all the situation should be computed naturally merits. The new courts will get enforce a duty of worry into a beneficial banker according to the character of your own exchange and demands from justice and you can security notwithstanding that a person doesn’t have a keen account into bank.