TECNIMONT ARABIA LIMITED v NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PLC

TECNIMONT ARABIA LIMITED v NATIONAL WESTMINSTER BANK PLC

The bank was not unjustly enriched at the claimant's expense because the international payment mechanism did not constitute a direct transfer or a transaction that could be treated as direct under the law post-Investment Trust Companies v HMRC. There was no proprietary claim, no tracing through mixed funds, and the funds were not trust property. Even if unjust enrichment were established, the bank was entitled to rely on the defence of change of position, having acted in good faith and without unconscionability.

Parties
Claimant: Tecnimont Arabia Limited; Defendant: National Westminster Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Knowing Receipt, Unjust Enrichment, Change of Position Defence, Bank Fraud, International Payments
Banking Law Restitution Unjust Enrichment Knowing Receipt Change of Position Defence Bank Fraud International Payments

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tecnimont Arabia Limited

Claimant

National Westminster Bank PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant bank was unjustly enriched at the claimant's expense following an authorised push payment fraud
  2. 2 Whether the defendant is liable for knowing receipt of trust property
  3. 3 Whether the bank can rely on the defence of change of position

Ratio Decidendi

The bank was not unjustly enriched at the claimant's expense because the international payment mechanism did not constitute a direct transfer or a transaction that could be treated as direct under the law post-Investment Trust Companies v HMRC. There was no proprietary claim, no tracing through mixed funds, and the funds were not trust property. Even if unjust enrichment were established, the bank was entitled to rely on the defence of change of position, having acted in good faith and without unconscionability.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed