← All Authorities
United Kingdom professional negligencenature of fiduciary relationshipquincecare duty

Woods v Martins Bank Ltd

[1959] 1 QB 55
JurisdictionUnited Kingdom
CourtHigh Court (Queen's Bench Division)
Year1959
StatusBinding authority

Summary

A bank may owe an advisory duty of care to a customer extending beyond normal banking services, and a fiduciary relationship can arise from negligent investment advice given by a bank manager.

Key Principle

Bank may owe advisory duty to customer beyond normal banking services; negligent investment advice by bank manager; fiduciary relationship

Area of Law

banking

Related Cases

Westpac Banking Corporation v Lenthall (2019) 272 CLR 1

A bank owes a duty of care to guarantors to take reasonable steps to ensure they understand the nature and effect of the guarantee under the Code of Banking Practice.

AUSTRAC v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2018] FCA 930

CBA liable for systemic AML/CTF Act contraventions including failure to report suspicious matters and threshold transactions via intelligent deposit machines, resulting in $700 million civil penalty.

Paciocco v ANZ Banking Group Ltd (Full Federal Court) (2015) 236 FCR 199

Full Federal Court held that bank late payment fees were not penalties or unconscionable under consumer protection law as they bore a genuine pre-estimate of loss or legitimate commercial interest.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of Woods v Martins Bank Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain Woods v Martins Bank Ltd