Restitution Discussion Group Archives
| Sender: |
Duncan Sheehan |
| Date: |
Mon, 8 Mar 1999 19:34:57 |
| Re: |
contribution |
Dear All,
In this example the fraudster gets the Turkish bank to collect Middle
Temple's cheque and that Turkish bank persuades Lloyds to collect it in
London. I would have thought that in principle Rix J was right to give
contribution. They do convert the same thing, the cheque, and as we know
that is not necessarily conclusive, but is it not the same act of conversion.
The cheque is only collected wrongly once. Both the Turkish bank and Lloyds
are involved in that tortious conversion in that the Turkish bank wrongfully
induces Lloyds to wrongfully collect the cheque on its behalf, so surely
the two banks are both involved in the same act of conversion. There is
no serial conversion and they are both liable and hence can claim contribution
from each other.
Duncan Sheehan
<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==>
»
»
»
»
| For
editorial policy, see here. For the unedited archive, see here. The archive editor is Steve Hedley. |
