On 12 July 2023, the UK Supreme Court handed down its judgment in Philipp v Barclays (2023) UKSC 25. The Supreme Court allowed Barclays’ appeal on the main issue, namely, whether the Quincecare duty applies when the payment instruction is issued by the customer and not an agent of the customer and if not, whether it should be extended to apply.
Philipp claimed that the features of the payments would have put an ordinary prudent banker on inquiry and that the Bank ought to have delayed the transfers and asked questions.
The High Court initially granted summary judgment for the Bank which was overturned by the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal held that “the Quincecare duty owed by a Bank, not to execute payment instructions when on inquiry of a potential fraud, could in principle arise even where the customer is giving direct payment instructions and not via an agent”.
This alert examines the decision and the key industry and practice takeaways for Uganda.