Midland Bank Plc v Messrs Cox McQueen (A Firm) [1999] EWCA Civ 656 (26 January 1999)

Midland Bank Plc v Messrs Cox McQueen (A Firm) [1999] EWCA Civ 656 (26 January 1999)

The solicitors' retainer did not impose an absolute obligation to obtain Mrs Dukes' genuine signature but only required the exercise of reasonable care and skill. The language of the retainer and certificate did not clearly impose strict liability for undetectable fraud. Therefore, the solicitors were not liable for the forged signature, and the appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[1999] EWCA Civ 656
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Midland Bank PLC; Defendant/respondent: Messrs Cox McQueen (A Firm)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 January 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division (mercantile List) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Solicitors' Retainer, Interpretation of Professional Obligations, Forgery, Breach of Contract, Collateral Warranty
Contract Law Professional Negligence Solicitors' Retainer Interpretation of Professional Obligations Forgery Breach of Contract Collateral Warranty

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Midland Bank PLC

Plaintiff/appellant

Messrs Cox McQueen (A Firm)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Queen's Bench Division (mercantile List) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether solicitors retained by a bank to obtain a signature on a mortgage are under an absolute obligation to ensure the signature is genuine or only to exercise reasonable care and skill
  2. 2 Whether the certificate provided by the solicitors constitutes a collateral warranty imposing absolute liability

Ratio Decidendi

The solicitors' retainer did not impose an absolute obligation to obtain Mrs Dukes' genuine signature but only required the exercise of reasonable care and skill. The language of the retainer and certificate did not clearly impose strict liability for undetectable fraud. Therefore, the solicitors were not liable for the forged signature, and the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Leave to appeal to House of Lords refused