SHORUBBER (M) SDN BHD vs CIMB BANK BERHAD

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 MarsdenLR 311

HIGH COURT MALAYA PULAU PINANG
SHORUBBER (M) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
CIMB BANK BERHAD – Respondent

Table of Content
1. the liability of the bank rests on the authority established through customer transactions. (Para 1 , 5 , 6 , 8)
2. estoppel requires clear and direct communication of authority or representation from the customer. (Para 9 , 26 , 30 , 34)
3. the bank's duty of good faith is critical in handling transactions involving forged cheques. (Para 10 , 12 , 36 , 49)

Varghese George Varughese J:

Introduction

[1] The Plaintiff was a customer of the Defendant, a commercial bank (the Defendant-Bank). The Plaintiff by this action in essence sought to recover monies that had been debited from the Plaintiff's account as a result of the Defendant-Bank honouring and paying out on allegedly forged cheques presented for clearance.

[2] The trial which commenced on 22 November 2012 stretched over some 17 days. Seven (7) witnesses testified for the Plaintiff while the Defendant-Bank called twenty-one (21) witnesses.

[3] On 19 December 2014, I allowed the Plaintiff's claim and made the following orders:

(a) The Defendant-Bank was not entitled to debit the Plaintiff account for the 173 cheques as listed in the First Schedule to the Re-Amended Statement of Claim amounting to a sum of RM33,338,639

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 MarsdenLR 311

HIGH COURT MALAYA PULAU PINANGSHORUBBER (M) SDN BHD – AppellantVersusCIMB BANK BERHAD – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

HIGH COURT MALAYA PULAU PINANG
SHORUBBER (M) SDN BHD – Appellant
Versus
CIMB BANK BERHAD – Respondent