Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly
ASSUMPTION OF RESPONSIBILITY, NEGLIGENCE AND FREEZING ORDERS
Customs & Excise Commissioners v. Barclays Bank
The decision of the Court of Appeal in Customs & Excise Commissioners
v. Barclays Bank Plc
1
concerns a bank’s liability for failing to comply with a freezing order over money it was holding for a customer. However, it has more general significance in that the Court of Appeal revisits the troubled issues of the tests for determining the existence of a tortious duty of care to guard against pure economic loss and, in particular, the notion of “assumption of responsibility”.
The presumed facts of the case were straightforward. The claimants, the Customs & Excise Commissioners, had obtained freezing orders against two customers of the bank in respect of unpaid Value Added Tax. These orders prohibited disposal of or dealing with the company’s assets, including money in specified bank accounts. The claimant’s solicitors had given notice of the existence of these orders to the bank by fax. In spite of
CASE AND COMMENT
161