82,891
edits
Banque Worms v BankAmerica International: Difference between revisions
Banque Worms v BankAmerica International (view source)
Revision as of 18:57, 18 February 2021
, 18 February 2021no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|casenote|}}This case, fondly known to [[restitution]] fans and other obstreperous rascals of the financial services industry as ''[[Banque Worms]]'' involved a [[revolving credit facility]] between one Spedley and the Banque. | {{a|casenote|{{citer|Banque Worms|BankAmerica International|2d Cir. 1991|928 F.2d 538}}[[File:Can of Banque Worms.png|450px|thumb|center|A can of Banque Worms yesterday. (The decision, not the Banque, obviously)]]}}This case, fondly known to [[restitution]] fans and other obstreperous rascals of the financial services industry as ''[[Banque Worms]]'' involved a [[revolving credit facility]] between one Spedley and the Banque. | ||
===Facts=== | ===Facts=== | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
On 10 April 1989, at 12:36 am,<ref>Yes, I was thinking that too. These dudes work crazy hours. A mistake was bound to happen.</ref> Spedley instructed its bank, SPI, to wire the total amount due to the Banque at its BankAmerica account. By 3:37 am the same day – not three hours later – Spedley had a change of heart and instructed SPI to stop payment to Banque Worms and instead make a payment in the same amount to National Westminster Bank USA.” | On 10 April 1989, at 12:36 am,<ref>Yes, I was thinking that too. These dudes work crazy hours. A mistake was bound to happen.</ref> Spedley instructed its bank, SPI, to wire the total amount due to the Banque at its BankAmerica account. By 3:37 am the same day – not three hours later – Spedley had a change of heart and instructed SPI to stop payment to Banque Worms and instead make a payment in the same amount to National Westminster Bank USA.” | ||
You won’t believe this, but notwithstanding the second instruction SPI went ahead and wired the full amount to BankAmerica. Can you imagine it? About two hours after ''that'' SPI informed BankAmerica of the mistake and asked for the money back. ''Assuming that BankAmerica would send the money back'',<ref>Don’t ''arseyoume'', kids: it makes an “arse” out of “you” and “me”. Actually, given that its first instruction was in breach of mandate, it was obliged to send the money to NatWest whether it got it back or not.</ref> SPI then sent the exact same amount to National Westminster Bank USA as well. | You won’t believe this, but notwithstanding the second instruction SPI went ahead and wired the full amount to BankAmerica. Can you imagine it? About two hours after ''that'' SPI informed BankAmerica of the mistake and asked for the money back. ''Assuming that BankAmerica would send the money back'',<ref>Don’t ''arseyoume'', kids: it makes an “arse” out of “you” and “me”. Actually, given that its first instruction was in breach of mandate, it was obliged to send the money to NatWest whether it got it back or not.</ref> SPI then sent the exact same amount to National Westminster Bank USA as well, and when the money did ''not'' come back from BankAmerica, SPI found itself in a bit of a spot. It sued | ||
===Issue=== | ===Issue=== | ||
Did Banque Worms have to pay the money back? | Did Banque Worms have to pay the money back? | ||