Esmail & Ors v Bank Of Scotland & Anor [1999] ScotCS 136 (4 June 1999)

Esmail & Ors v Bank Of Scotland & Anor [1999] ScotCS 136 (4 June 1999)

The power of attorney did not expressly or impliedly authorise the agent to operate joint bank accounts. The document was concerned with business activities and only authorised the agent to operate the grantor's own accounts, not joint accounts. Therefore, the bank was not entitled to treat the power of attorney as authority for the agent to operate the joint accounts in question.

Citation
[1999] ScotCS 136
Parties
Pursuer: Mahomed Ikbal Esmail; Pursuer: Mrs Fatima Latif Karim or Esmail; Pursuer: Mrs Zubeda Esmail; Pursuer: Tasmin Iqbal; Pursuer: Adila Esmail; Defender: The Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland; Defender: Another (not named)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 June 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil / Procedure Roll Debate; Interlocutory Decision on Relevancy and Scope of Proof
Outcome
Proof restricted to quantification of loss; defenders' pleas-in-law repelled except as to quantum; actions proceed to proof on quantum only.
Legal Topics
Power of Attorney, Joint Bank Accounts, Bank's Duty of Care, Authority of Agent, Quantification of Loss
Banking Law Agency Law Scots Law Power of Attorney Joint Bank Accounts Bank's Duty of Care Authority of Agent Quantification of Loss

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

Parties

Mahomed Ikbal Esmail

Pursuer

Mrs Fatima Latif Karim or Esmail

Pursuer

Mrs Zubeda Esmail

Pursuer

Tasmin Iqbal

Pursuer

Adila Esmail

Pursuer

The Governor and Company of the Bank of Scotland

Defender

Another (not named)

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Procedure Roll Debate; Interlocutory Decision on Relevancy and Scope of Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the power of attorney authorised the agent to operate joint bank accounts
  2. 2 Whether the bank owed a duty of enquiry regarding the authority of the agent
  3. 3 Whether the bank acted in accordance with actual authority and written instructions

Ratio Decidendi

The power of attorney did not expressly or impliedly authorise the agent to operate joint bank accounts. The document was concerned with business activities and only authorised the agent to operate the grantor's own accounts, not joint accounts. Therefore, the bank was not entitled to treat the power of attorney as authority for the agent to operate the joint accounts in question.

Court Disposition

Proof restricted to quantification of loss; defenders' pleas-in-law repelled except as to quantum; actions proceed to proof on quantum only.

Orders

  • Sustain pursuers' first plea-in-law to the extent of restricting enquiry to quantum.
  • Repel defenders' pleas-in-law except as to quantum in each action.