Gaynor v McDyer and Another
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 19 December 1968 |
| Date | 19 December 1968 |
| Court | Supreme Court |
Countermand of banker's authority - Presentment for payment - Dishonour by non-payment - Payee's cause of action against drawer - Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, ss. 38, 47, 55, 57, 73, 75.
The defendants drew a cheque for £65 on their banker in favour of the plaintiff, and delivered it to him. The plaintiff duly presented the cheque for payment but the defendants, before presentment, had countermanded the authority of their banker to pay the cheque and, consequently, the plaintiff was unable to obtain payment of the cheque. Held by the Supreme Court ( Ó Dálaigh C.J., Walsh and FitzCerald JJ.), 1, that the non-payment of the cheque by reason of such countermand constituted a dishonour of the cheque by non-payment; 2, that the payee had a cause of action on the cheque against the drawers for payment of the amount thereof. Kenneally v. LyonsDIJR [1958] Ir. Jur. Rep. 54 overruled. Cohen v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomas (Ralston) v United General Insurance Company Ltd/Advantage General Insurance Company Ltd
...and (viii) Damage." 13 Among the cases cited by learned counsel were Swain v Hillman [2001] 1 All ER 91, Gaynor v McDyer and another [1968] IR 295, Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119 and the unreported decision in Anderson v The Attorney General and another C.L. A. ......
-
Carevest Capital Inc. v. Leduc (County),
...refd to. [para. 26]. Elliott v. Crutchley, [1904] 1 K.B. 565 (C.A.), affd. [1906] A.C. 7 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 30]. Gaynor v. McDyer, [1968] I.R. 295 (S.C.), refd to. [para. Curley v. Briggs, [1920] 2 W.W.R. 1025; 13 Sask. L.R. 346 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30]. Pollway Ltd. v. Abdullah, [1......