Public Bank v 1. New Ace Digital Print Sdn Bhd 2. Cheah Yang Kiang

no-02f-133-11-2017w Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) 13 March 2019 • No. 02(f)-133-11/2017(W)

Catchwords

Banking Law — Banker and customer — Joint account — Bank honoured forged cheque presented by surviving joint account holder (“survivor”) - Whether survivorship clause conferred survivor beneficial ownership of the money in joint account — Whether bank absolved its liability under joint account by adhering to survivorship clause — Whether payment made pursuant to survivorship clause by way of a forged cheque and in breach of s 24 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1949 constituted a valid discharge by bank - Whether bank had contractual relationship with respondents — Whether respondents had cause of action over joint account to which they were not parties — Bills of Exchange Act 1949 ss 24 and 73A Evidence Law — Proof — Admissibility — Admissibility of oral evidence — Whether oral evidence could be admitted to contradict written term of banking contract that joint account was personal account — Whether Court of Appeal erred in admitting oral evidence

Practice Areas

Banking Law

Judges (5)

Ahmad bin Haji Maarop Delivered Alizatul Khair binti Osman Khairuddin Coram Balia Yusof bin Haji Wahi Coram Rohana binti Yusuf Coram Zaharah binti Ibrahim Coram

Parties (2)

New Ace Digital Print Sdn Bhd 2. Cheah Yang Kiang Respondent Public Bank Appellant

Case Significance

Public Bank v 1. New Ace Digital Print Sdn Bhd 2. Cheah Yang Kiang is a Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) decision dated March 13, 2019 (citation: no-02f-133-11-2017w). The panel comprised Ahmad bin Haji Maarop, Alizatul Khair binti Osman Khairuddin, Balia Yusof bin Haji Wahi, Rohana binti Yusuf and Zaharah binti Ibrahim, with Ahmad bin Haji Maarop delivering the judgment.

What was the outcome of Public Bank v 1. New Ace Digital Print Sdn Bhd 2. Cheah Yang Kiang?

Public Bank v 1. New Ace Digital Print Sdn Bhd 2. Cheah Yang Kiang is a Federal Court decision dated March 13, 2019. The case was heard by Ahmad bin Haji Maarop. See the full judgment for details.