Responding to the financial abuse of older people - Loddon ...

79. BFSO, above n 71, p. 21.
80. Australian Bankers’ Association, Code of Banking Practice cl 22.
81. BFSO, above n 71, p. 21.
82. BFSO, above n 71, p. 22.
83. BFSO, above n 71, p. 22.
84. Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) s 6
(table 1 items 2 and 3) and Part 2.
85. Foley v Hill (1848) 2 HL Cas 28 at 35 per Lyndhurst LC.
86. BFSO, above n 71, p. 14.
87. Lipkin Gorman (a firm) v Karpnale Ltd [1992] 4 All ER 409 at 418, per May LJ.
88. Lipkin Gorman (a firm) v Karpnale Ltd [1992] 4 All ER 331 at 349, per Alliott LJ.
89. ‘(1) a bank is entitled to treat the customer’s mandate at its face value save
in extreme cases; (2) a bank is not obliged to question any transaction which is
in accordance with the mandate, unless a reasonable banker would have grounds
for believing that the authorised signatories are misusing their authority for the
purpose of defrauding their principal or otherwise defeating his true intention;
(3) it follows that if a bank does not have reasonable grounds for believing that
there is fraud it must pay; (4) mere suspicion or unease do not constitute reasonable
grounds and are not enough to justify a bank in failing to act in accordance with
a mandate; (5) a bank is not required to act as an amateur detective.’
90. Lipkin Gorman (a firm) v Karpnale Ltd [1992] 4 All ER 409 at 439, per Parker LJ.
Parker LJ also said, at 439, that expressions ‘such as that a paying bank must
pay under its mandate save in extreme cases, or that a bank is not obliged to act
as an amateur detective, or that suspicion is not enough to justify failing to pay
according to the mandate, or other like observations which are to be found in the
cases, are no more than comments on particular facts or situations and embody
in my view no principles of law. Furthermore, what would or might have been
held to be a breach of duty at one time may not be a breach of duty at another.’
91. Lipkin Gorman (a firm) v Karpnale Ltd [1992] 4 All ER 409 at 441, per Parker LJ.
92. BFSO, above n 71, p. 14; see also Macmillan Inc v Bishopgate Investment Trust plc
(No 3) [1995] 1 WLR 978 per Bowen LJ and Steyn J.
93. BFSO, above n 71, p. 14; see also Lipkin Gorman (a firm) v Karpnale Ltd [1992]
4 All ER 409 at 437, per Parker LJ.
94. BFSO, above n 71, p. 23.
95. Cheques Act 1986 (Cth) s 33(1).
56