In the case of Philipp v Barclays Bank UK plc  EWCA Civ 318, the Court of Appeal has allowed the appeal from Mrs Philipp against the decision of the High Court in 2021 to give judgment to Barclays Bank UK plc on its summary judgment application.
The 2021 High Court decision restricted the application of the “Quincecare Duty” to cases where the instruction to the Bank was made by an agent of the customer, such as a director of a limited company customer. The Court of Appeal has now held that whilst previous cases involved an agent of the customer giving the instruction, it wasn’t the case that the “Quincecare Duty” was restricted to such facts. The crucial element to determine is whether the facts were sufficient for the Bank to be “on inquiry” when the customer instructed it to make the payments and if it was, then was it under a duty to use reasonable skill and care in executing those orders. If it was in breach of that duty then the Bank may be liable.
The fact that the instruction may have come from either an agent of the customer or the customer itself did not affect whether the duty applied or not.