Our articles are written by experts in their field and include individual barristers, solicitors, academics, judges, and leading firms in relevant areas of practice. JIBFL offers authoritative insights into global banking and financial law, providing essential updates for legal practitioners and policymakers. Covering key topics like lending, security interests, derivatives, debt capital markets, banking and finance related disputes, crypto, FinTech and financial regulation, JIBFL serves as a trusted resource for navigating complex legal challenges and staying informed in the financial sector. If you would like to contribute, please email Amanda.Cohen2@lexisnexis.com.
Quincecare and the question of government liability where there has been Bounce Back Loan fraud
© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.
Two recent circuit commercial court decisions have considered the scope of a Payment Service Provider’s duty of care to its customer when executing payment instructions (Quincecare duty) in the contexts of identity fraud: Hamblin v World First Limited [2020] EWHC 2383 (Comm) and authorised push payment fraud: Philipp v Barclays Bank UK Plc [2021] EWHC 10 (Comm). This article speculates in the light of these two decisions whether, where scheme funds lent under the Coronavirus Bounce Back Loan Scheme have been misapplied, the British Business Bank could escape liability under the Scheme guarantee on the grounds that the lender has breached its Quincecare duty.
If you are already a User, sign in
Or you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Alternatively you can subscribe here to read unlimited content.
