Negligence—banks and the duty of care

Published by a ��˾��ҹ�� Dispute Resolution expert

Practice notes

Negligence—banks and the duty of care

Published by a ��˾��ҹ�� Dispute Resolution expert

Practice notes

The number of claims against banks continues apace. This Practice Note focuses on specific issues arising in respect of the tortious Duty of care owed by banks to their customers, namely the so-called ‘Quincecare duty of care’, assumption of responsibility and the volunteering of advice.

For guidance in relation to the role of banks in the various financial mis-selling claims, see Practice Note: Standard of care in professional Negligence claims—Negligent financial mis-selling claims.

For guidance on negligence claims generally, see: Tort and negligence claims—overview, and as to negligence specifically, see Practice Notes:

•
Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claim
•
Negligence—when does a duty of care arise?
•
Negligence—when is the duty of care breached?

For guidance on professional negligence claims, see: Professional negligence claims—overview.

Framing a bank’s duty to its customer

Before considering the potential scope for a bank’s tortious duty of care to its customer, it is important to remember that, as in the case of Philipp v Barclays Bank UK plc, the relationship between a bank and its customer

Jurisdiction(s):

United Kingdom

Key definition:

Negligence definition

What does Negligence mean?

Negligence is 'the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon those considerations which ordinarily regulate human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do' (Blythe v Birmingham Waterworks (1856) 11 Exch 781, at p 784). It is accepted that the test for breach of duty is objective, in the sense that the individual character and mental and physical features of the particular defendant are usually irrelevant.

��˾��ҹ��