Case Brief: Chapter 12 Case 123 Mair v' Bank of Nova Scotia

1
Case Brief Chapter 12 - Case 12-3Mair v. Bank
of Nova Scotia

• CSA 6470 International Legal Framework
• Presented by Veronica Diaz 

2
Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia

• Judicial Body
• Court of Appeal of Eastern Caribbean States,
  Civil Division. West Indies.
• Facts  
• The appellant, Mair, is suing Bank of Nova
  Scotia through an appeal from a decision of Judge
  Robotham dated June 18, 1980.

3
Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia

• Background
• In 1974, Mair (an architect) engaged Barbara Hill
  of Barbados (another architect) to assist him in
  Antigua by doing specific architectural work.
• Check for payment of services was made payable to
  Barbara Hill but it was altered on the face by
  the addition of the word Associates as payee,
  endorsed Barbara Hill and deposited at the branch
  of the respondent bank in Barbados to the credit
  of Barbara Hill Associates.
• Check was returned to the Antigua branch of the
  bank who deducted 6,000 from Mairs account.

4
Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia

• When Mair received cancelled check, he drew the
  banks attention to the alteration and demanded
  reimbursement on the grounds that it was
  negligent in not observing the alteration in
  which event the check should not have been paid.
• Bank refused to reimburse Mair and he proceeded
  to initiate legal action against the bank.
• On the trial, Judge Robotham decided in favor of
  the respondent bank.

5
Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia

• Issue
• This is an appeal from a decision of Judge
  Robotham in which judgment was given for the
  respondent bank in respect of a claim by the
  appellant alleging negligence and beach of duty
  in the sum of 6,000 and interest, together with
  costs.
• Decision
• The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and
  varied the order of the trial judge by entering
  judgment for the appellant in the sum of 5
  nominal damages.
• The appellant, Mair, did not really win the
  appeal, since he was looking for 6,000 and
  interest, together with costs and Bank of Nova
  Scotia ended up paying 5,995 less than in the
  initial ruling by the trial judge.

6
Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia

• Rational
• In the appeal, the counsel admitted
• that the alteration was material on the face of
  the instrument (which made it void) under Section
  64 of the Bills of Exchange Act (of Antigua and
  Barbuda) and under similar legislation throughout
  the West Indies British Commonwealth.
• that the mandate of the drawer of the check was
  not substantially carried out
• that the alteration was apparent
• that the bank was not a holder in due course
  (which means it does not receive the bill in its
  own intrinsic credit)
• that the damage suffered was the debiting of the
  appellants account with a payment to someone
  other than the payee stated by the appellant.

7
Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia

• The appellant claimed that the damage suffered by
  him is the debiting of his bank account with an
  amount payable by check drawn by him to Barbara
  Hill and not Barbara Hill Associates, but the
  court was unable to perceive what damage the
  appellant has suffered on account of the
  alteration of the check.
•  
• On the question of damages, the appellants claim
  is in contract. It is a well-established
  principle that whenever a party proves a breach
  of contract but no actual damage (as was
  contended by learned counsel for the bank) he
  recovers as a rule nominal damages only.

8
Mair v. Bank of Nova Scotia

• Relevancy
• Case is relevant to international business
  managers, especially in the banking industry.
• It highlights the importance of not accepting an
  altered bill or note, because that invalidates it
  and the bank could face the responsibility of
  covering the amount for its client if the court
  proves that the alteration is material and that
  the debiting of the account of the customer
  actually caused damages.
• This case
• offers information as to what determines
  materiality
• explains the difference of being or not being a
  holder in due course
• provides perspective on the scope of
  responsibilities, role and assumed liabilities of
  a bank in regards to the transactions carried out
  on behalf of its clients.