Case # 2
Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia
Prepared for: Mr. Urem
Monica Kuijt Rumayor08058733
Leron Mardenborough 08084157
Farah Dara Carriza 08059365
Njoek-sien Baptist 09073728
Dennis Kreeft 08079684
Kaylee Hu 09088091
Class: 3 IBMS B
September 29, 2010
Summary of the case
This case is titled: “Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia”
The main focus of the case is on the Bill of Exchange act. The definition and several examples of other cases concerning this act are mentioned in the case. The actual case that is mentioned is about the appeal from a decision of Judge Robotham date 18th of June 1980. The appellant, an architect, sued the bank of Nova Scotia after noticing that the bank paid out a check that is noticeable altered. The architect wants the bank to pay back the 6000 dollars that the bank deducted from their bank account plus interest and other costs. After taking the case to the trial court the judge dismissed the bank of paying the amount of 6000 dollars and interest.
The architect did not agree with this decision and took the case to the court of appeal. The decision of the court appeal was in favour of the architect. The court based its decision on section 64(1) of the Bill of Exchange Act, and decided that the bank was not holder in due course. However, the court denies the amount that the appellant sued for for damages. The court made a statement concerning the amount of damages that needs to pay. The court states that the bank needs to pay 5 dollars to the appellant for damages.
Background Information and Facts
Bill of exchange (B/E, or draft, as it is sometimes called) is a written, dated, and signed instrument that contains an unconditional order from the drawer that directs the drawee to pay a definite sum of money to a payee on demand or at a specified future date.
The problem occurs in this case is alleging negligence and breach of duty in the sum of $6,000 and interest together with cost.
The appellant, an architect, engaged with Barbara Hill of Barbados in assisting him in Antigua by doing specific architectural work. The appellant gave Hill an advance of $6,000 payable by check drawn on the St. John’s Antigua, branch of the Bank of Nova Scotia for work already done and to be done in the future.
The parties that are involved in this case are: The architect (appellant) and the bank (defendant). There has been a legal relations established between these two parties.
- An employment contract was established between the appellant, architect, and Barbara Hill
- The method of payment was determined to be a check that will be drawn by the branch of Bank Nova Scotia, St. John in Antigua.
- There was some argument happened between the appellant and Barbara Hill in which the check that was given to her was altered by putting the word “Associates”
- An amount of $6,000 was deducted by the Bank of Nova Scotia from the appellant’s account although it was an altered check
Section 64 of the Bills of Exchange Act:
1. Where a bill or acceptance is materially altered without the assent of all the parties liable on the bill, the bill is avoided except as against a party who has himself made, authorized, or assented to the alteration, and subsequent endorsers. Provided that, where a bill has been materially altered, but the alterations not apparent and the bill is in the hands of a holder in due course, such holder may avail himself of the bill as if it had been altered, and may enforce payment of it according to its original tenor.
2. In particular the following alterations are material, namely any alteration of the date, the sum payable, the time of payment, the place of payment, and where a bill has been accepted generally, the addition of a place of payment without the acceptor’s assent.