CCP Graduate School Limited v National Westminster Bank Plc & Anor

CCP Graduate School Limited v National Westminster Bank Plc & Anor

The claims against the First Defendant are struck out as statute barred and for disclosing no reasonable cause of action under current law (no Quincecare duty on these facts). The application to amend to plead a retrieval duty against the First Defendant is refused as it constitutes a new claim outside limitation and does not arise from the same or substantially the same facts. Against the Second Defendant, the claim is not wholly statute barred in respect of sums remaining in the account on 18 October 2016, and the claim based on a retrieval duty is not struck out as the law is unsettled and further disclosure may be material. The application to amend against the Second Defendant is...

Parties
Claimant: CCP Graduate School Limited; First Defendant: National Westminster Bank PLC; Second Defendant: Santander UK PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil (banking/commercial) / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications; Application to Amend Pleadings
Outcome
First Defendant: Claim struck out and summary judgment granted; application to amend refused. Second Defendant: Application to strike out/summary judgment refused in respect of retrieval duty; application to amend allowed to clarify retrieval duty claim.
Legal Topics
Quincecare Duty, APP Fraud, Limitation of Actions, Summary Judgment, Strike Out, Retrieval Duty, Third Party Duty of Care, Amendment of Pleadings
Banking Law Contract Law Tort Law Civil Procedure Quincecare Duty APP Fraud Limitation of Actions Summary Judgment +4 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 6 Authorities cited 35 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CCP Graduate School Limited

Claimant

National Westminster Bank PLC

First Defendant

Santander UK PLC

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (banking/commercial) / Summary Judgment and Strike Out Applications; Application to Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claims against the First and Second Defendants are statute barred under the Limitation Act 1980
  2. 2 Whether a Quincecare duty or retrieval duty is owed by the First Defendant to the Claimant
  3. 3 Whether a retrieval duty is owed by the Second Defendant (a third party bank) to the Claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The claims against the First Defendant are struck out as statute barred and for disclosing no reasonable cause of action under current law (no Quincecare duty on these facts). The application to amend to plead a retrieval duty against the First Defendant is refused as it constitutes a new claim outside limitation and does not arise from the same or substantially the same facts. Against the Second Defendant, the claim is not wholly statute barred in respect of sums remaining in the account on 18 October 2016, and the claim based on a retrieval duty is not struck out as the law is unsettled and further disclosure may be material. The application to amend against the Second Defendant is...

Court Disposition

First Defendant: Claim struck out and summary judgment granted; application to amend refused. Second Defendant: Application to strike out/summary judgment refused in respect of retrieval duty; application to amend allowed to clarify retrieval duty claim.

Orders

  • Claim against First Defendant struck out and summary judgment granted in its favour.
  • Claimant's application to amend against First Defendant refused.