Английская Википедия:Dextra Bank & Trust Co Ltd v Bank of Jamaica

Материал из Онлайн справочника
Перейти к навигацииПерейти к поиску

Шаблон:Use dmy dates Шаблон:Use British English Шаблон:Infobox court case Шаблон:Cite BAILII is an important case in unjust enrichment in the Privy Council.

Facts

Dextra drew a cheque for $2,999,000 from its bankers to lend to the Bank of Jamaica. Its agents told Dextra the money was for a loan. The Bank of Jamaica was told the money was for foreign currency purchased by its agents. They gave the money to the agents, but the agents were fraudsters. Dextra wanted restitution.

Judgment

The Privy Council held that the claim failed, first because Dextra had made no relevant mistake of fact, and second because the Bank of Jamaica had changed its position. On the question of the change of position defence, Dextra argued that the Bank of Jamaica were relatively at fault, and therefore their defence should fail. Lord Bingham and Lord Goff said in the course of their advice,

Шаблон:Cquote

Comment

The decision in Dextra has been broadly accepted by academic lawyers, although it has been pointed out that the difference between a "misprediction" and a "mistake of fact" is a very narrow one.[1] In Шаблон:Cite bailii the court held that where the claimant paid drachmas into an account under the mistaken belief that the drachmas would be converted into US dollars, that was a mistake of fact which could found a restitutionary claim.

See also

Footnotes

Шаблон:Reflist