First City Monument Bank Plc v Zumax Nigeria Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 294 (01 March 2019)

First City Monument Bank Plc v Zumax Nigeria Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 294 (01 March 2019)

The transfers were not subject to any trust (express or Quistclose); the relationship was debtor-creditor, not trustee-beneficiary. FCMB should be allowed to defend on the basis of payment/accounting for the disputed transfers. Summary judgment was wrongly granted on the trust issue.

Citation
[2019] EWCA Civ 294
Parties
Appellant (defendant): First City Monument Bank PLC; Respondent (claimant): Zumax Nigeria Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Summary Judgment (high Court, Business List, Ch D) / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; summary judgment on trust issue set aside; FCMB permitted to defend on payment/accounting for first, second, fourth to ninth transfers; appeal dismissed as regards tenth transfer.
Legal Topics
Express Trust, Quistclose Trust, Banker Customer Relationship, Summary Judgment, Payment Defence, Abuse of Process, Cause of Action Estoppel
Trusts Banking Law Commercial Law Express Trust Quistclose Trust Banker Customer Relationship Summary Judgment Payment Defence +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

First City Monument Bank PLC

Appellant (defendant)

Zumax Nigeria Limited

Respondent (claimant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Summary Judgment (high Court, Business List, Ch D) / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether transfers were subject to an express or Quistclose trust
  2. 2 Whether FCMB paid or accounted to Zumax for the disputed transfers
  3. 3 Whether Zumax's claim for the tenth transfer is barred by abuse of process or cause of action estoppel

Ratio Decidendi

The transfers were not subject to any trust (express or Quistclose); the relationship was debtor-creditor, not trustee-beneficiary. FCMB should be allowed to defend on the basis of payment/accounting for the disputed transfers. Summary judgment was wrongly granted on the trust issue.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; summary judgment on trust issue set aside; FCMB permitted to defend on payment/accounting for first, second, fourth to ninth transfers; appeal dismissed as regards tenth transfer.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed on trust and payment grounds
  • Summary judgment set aside for disputed transfers