Judiciary-Poetry-Logo
JPoetry

BANK OWES A DUTY TO MAINTAIN CUSTOMER DETAILS CONFIDENTIALITY

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Dictum

In my view, this measure was put in place to protect each customer’s account from every form of fraud or possible mix up. The bank also owes its customer an unalloyed duty of confidentiality not to disclose these information to third parties and any breach of these duties could give rise to liability in damages if loss results. This duty arises between a banker and customer upon the opening of an account and continues beyond the time when the account is closed. See UBA v. Corporate Affairs Commission & Ors (2016) LPELR-40569 (CA); Christofi v. Barclays Bank Plc. (2000) 1 WLR 937. … It is not in dispute that the relationship between the Appellant and the Respondent was that of Banker and Customer. The Bank therefore owes the Respondent a duty to exercise high standard of care not only in managing the Respondent’s monies but also his information and details which are in its custody. See Mainstreet Bank Ltd v. Juumanwin Nig. Ltd. (2013) LPELR-21855 (CA); Agbanelo v. UBN (2000) 4 SC Pt. 1 Pg 243.

— H.M. Ogunwumiju, JCA. First Bank v Oronsaye (2019) – CA/B/335/13

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

DUTY OF BANK TO EXERCISE REASONABLE SKILL

Without a doubt, a banker has the duty to exercise reasonable care and skill in regard to its customer’s affairs. The law is that a bank has a duty under its contract with its customer to exercise reasonable care and skill in carrying out its part with regard to the operations within its contracts with its customers. The duty to exercise reasonable care and skill extends over the whole range of banking business within the contract with the customer and includes interpreting, ascertaining and acting in accordance with the instruction of the customer. The relationship between the banker and customer is contractual and the relationship, in the absence of an express agreement between the parties to the contrary, is implied from the course of business between them. In circumstances where it has been alleged that a bank was negligent, as in this case, the circumstances must be such that establishes that the bank was not prudent or did not act in a satisfactory manner, in which case the tort of negligence will arise; since a prudent banker will never ignore the instruction given by the customer.

– Ogakwu, J.C.A Fijabi v. FBN (2021)

Was this dictum helpful?

BANK HAS DUTY TO EXERCISE REASONABLE CARE IN BANKING BUSINESS

New Improved Manibannc Ventures Ltd v. FBN Plc. (2009) LPELR 8757 (CA); (2009) 16 NWLR Pt. 1167 Pg. 411 the Court held thus:- “It is settled law that a bank has a duty under its contract with its customer to exercise reasonable care and skill in carrying out its part with regard to operations within its contract with its customers. The duty to exercise reasonable care and skill extends over a whole range of banking business within the contract with the customer.” See also Agbanelo v. U.B.N (supra); Diamond Bank Plc v. Dr. Levi Chulks Monanu (2012) LPELR-19955 (CA); Standard Trust Bank Ltd. v. Anumnu (2008) 14 NWLR Pt. 1106 Pg. 125; UBN Plc. v. Chimaeze (2014) 9 NWLR Pt. 1411 Pg. 166 (SC).

Was this dictum helpful?

RIDING IN THE DARK REQUIRES MORE CARE

In BAKER V. LONGHURST & SONS LTD. (1933) 2KB 461 AT 468; LORD SCRUTTON L.J observed thus: “If a person rides in the dark he must ride at such pace that he can pull up within the limit of his vision and if, in those circumstances, he strikes something, either he is going too fast or he has not been keeping a proper look out”. See: NGILARI V. MOTHERCAT LIMITED (supra).

Was this dictum helpful?

PROOF OF DUTY OF CARE IS REQUISITE FOR NEGLIGENCE TO SUCCEED

The authorities are replete that a successful plea of negligence consists of proving the trivet issues of duty, breach and subsequent damages. In the case of GKF Investment Nigeria Ltd v. Nigerian Telecommunications Plc [2009] 15 NWLR (Pt 1164) 34, it is settled that the particulars of the pleading the breach of a duty of care is required as stated supra and it can neither be assumed or indirect; where there is no real duty to be exercised by the defendants, negligence will have no limbs to stand and any claim articulated thereon will fail.

— O. Oyewumi, J. Aseidu v Japaul (2019) – NICN/AK/01/2016

Was this dictum helpful?

PRACTICE AND DUTY IS DIFFERENT

The learned trial Judge from the above quoted finding, viewed “practice of construction companies” as the same with “duty of care of construction companies”. Practice and duty in ordinary English language do not stand for the same thing. The trial Court inferred duty of care from practice of construction companies. Inferring the circumstances upon which duty of care arises is miles away from specifically pleading duty of care as required by the law.

— U. Onyemenam, JCA. P.W. Ltd. v. Mansel Motors (2017) – CA/J/240/2016

Was this dictum helpful?

Click the icons to like, follow, and join JPoetry

Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Telegram

Humongouz Empire

© 2025

designed by Humongouz Ztudio. 

TO – 3527 | UO – 1 | GO – 3198 | BO – 328

External link(s)

BOOK: First 2-years as a Law Student: Experiences and Lessons.