|
À l’exception des 100 $ ajoutés à la traite bancaire, l’identification de l’argent dans le compte de BMP ne pose pas de problème. Il n’est pas contesté qu’il provient des fonds reçus de la BRC. En tant que mandataire, la BNÉ a reçu les fonds de la BRC et, après qu’elle les a portés au crédit de son mandant, BMP, ces fonds lui ont été de nouveau remis en vertu du contrat bancaire.
|
|
Save for the $100 added to the bank draft, there is no issue of identification of the money in BMP’s account. The unchallenged evidence is that it comes from the funds received from RBC. BNS, as agent, received the funds from RBC and, after crediting them to its principal, BMP, received them back under the banking contract. Having received the funds back, BNS had to make restitution to RBC. Therefore, BNS has a valid defence against BMP (see Bavins, Junr. & Sims v. London and South Western Bank, Ltd., [1900] 1 Q.B. 270 (C.A.)). BNS’s status with respect to the funds in the related accounts is different. BNS was not acting as agent of the holders of the related accounts. A review of the rules on tracing will therefore be helpful.
|