{"id":223753,"date":"2020-01-02T16:00:47","date_gmt":"2020-01-02T10:30:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=223753"},"modified":"2020-01-08T16:57:28","modified_gmt":"2020-01-08T11:27:28","slug":"uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/","title":{"rendered":"UK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach"},"content":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom<\/strong>: A Full Bench of Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Lloyd Jones, Lord Sales, and Lord Thomas, dismissed the appeal filed by a bank.<\/p>\n

In the present case, the respondent company, \u201cSingularis\u201d, is registered in the Cayman Islands, which was set up to manage the personal assets of Mr Maan Al Sanea. He was the company\u2019s sole shareholder and also one of the directors. The other 6 directors did not have any influence over the company\u2019s management. A loan financing for the purchase of shares was provided to Singularis in 2007, by the appellant investment bank i.e., Diawa. This loan was also the security for the repayment of the loan. In the year 2009, after the shares were sold and the loans were repaid, a surplus amount of money (US$204m) was held by the bank for the account of the respondent company. As per the instruction given by Al Sanea, Daiwa paid out the surplus funds to third parties. The payments were misappropriation of Singularis\u2019 fund and as a result of that Singularis was unable to meet the demands of the creditors. Singularis consequently entered into liquidation. On 18.09.2009, the Cayman Islands made a winding-up order and a joint liquidator were appointed for the same.<\/p>\n

Respondent company herein (Singularis) held a certain sum of money as a deposit with the appellant bank (Daiwa). In 2009, the bank Daiwa was instructed by an authorised signatory of Singularis (Mr. Al Sanea) to make payments out of Singularis\u2019 account. The Bank approved and completed the transfers notwithstanding many obvious and glaring signs that Mr. Al Sanea was perpetrating a fraud on the company. In 2014, Singularis issued a claim against the bank for USD 204 million (the total amount transferred in 2009). There were two bases for the claim: (i) dishonest assistance in Al Sanea\u2019s breach of fiduciary duty in misapplying Singularis\u2019 funds; and (ii) breach of the Quincecare duty of care owed by the Bank to Singularis by giving effect to the payment instructions.<\/p>\n

The Quincecare duty arises when bankers are asked to make payments in circumstances where there are reasonable grounds to suspect possible fraud. In such a situation, banks owe a duty of care to their customers to refrain from making payments. When \u201con inquiry\u201d in this way, banks have a positive duty to investigate the potential fraud, they have to be satisfied, by enquiring as far a reasonable banker could be expected to do so, that the payment is not fraudulent before they can be \u201coff inquiry\u201d and go on to comply with their contractual obligations and make the payment.<\/p>\n

The claim allowed by the High court was the breach of the Quincecare <\/em>duty of care. Since Daiwa\u2019s appeal against the finding of liability on the negligence was dismissed, it appealed to the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n

The main issue which arose in this matter was, whether the appellant bank was in the breach of its duty towards their customers by transferring the money regardless of circumstances which were suspicious. Also, whether the customer\u2019s claim against the bank was precluded by the fact that the fraudulent acts of the director should be attributed to the customer so as to bar the claim of the customer against the bank.<\/p>\n

According to the findings of the case, the judge held that there was a clear breach of Quincecare<\/em> duty of care by the appellant bank towards the respondent company. The possible defences raised by Daiwa were: illegality, causation, countervailing claim in deceit and attribution. The Court opined that whether or not Mr. Al Sanea\u2019s fraud was attributed to the company, the said defences would fail in any circumstance. It was held that Daiwa was liable to Singularis for its breach of Quincecare <\/em>duty. It was the appellant bank\u2019s duty to realise something suspicious was going on and a reasonable inquiry should have been done for the same. Due to Daiwa\u2019s negligence, the company (and through the company, its creditors) had to suffer and be victims of fraudulent incidents.<\/p>\n

Thus, the claims of Daiwa were dismissed and the judgment of the trial court was upheld. [Singularis Holdings Ltd. v. Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd., [2019] 3 WLR 997<\/a>, decided on 30-10-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom: A Full Bench of Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Lloyd Jones, Lord Sales, <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":56741,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,12],"tags":[3090,39099,39098,29690,30292,3065,39097],"class_list":["post-223753","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-foreigncourts","tag-bank","tag-breach","tag-customer-company","tag-liquidation","tag-loan","tag-negligence","tag-quincecare-duty"],"yoast_head":"\nUK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"UK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court of the United Kingdom: A Full Bench of Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Lloyd Jones, Lord Sales,\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2020-01-02T10:30:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-01-08T11:27:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1260\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"827\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/\",\"name\":\"UK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-01-02T10:30:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-01-08T11:27:28+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg\",\"width\":1260,\"height\":827},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"UK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"UK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"UK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach","og_description":"Supreme Court of the United Kingdom: A Full Bench of Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Lloyd Jones, Lord Sales,","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2020-01-02T10:30:47+00:00","article_modified_time":"2020-01-08T11:27:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1260,"height":827,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/","name":"UK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","datePublished":"2020-01-02T10:30:47+00:00","dateModified":"2020-01-08T11:27:28+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","width":1260,"height":827},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/02\/uk-sc-bank-held-liable-for-the-breach-of-quincecare-duty-of-care-towards-its-customer-company-first-successful-claim-for-such-a-breach\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"UK SC | Bank held liable for the breach of Quincecare duty of care towards its customer company \u2013 first successful claim for such a breach"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":233258,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/01\/uk-sc-members-of-charitable-companies-have-fiduciary-duties-therefore-court-can-direct-the-members-on-how-to-exercise-their-powers-in-the-absence-of-a-breach-of-fiduciary-duty\/","url_meta":{"origin":223753,"position":0},"title":"UK SC | Members of charitable companies have fiduciary duties; therefore Court can direct members on how to exercise their powers in absence of a breach of fiduciary duty","author":"Editor","date":"August 1, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Sucheta Sarkar, Editorial Assistant has put this story together","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":204002,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/20\/duty-to-care-covers-the-duty-to-not-provide-misleading-information-which-may-foreseeably-cause-physical-injury\/","url_meta":{"origin":223753,"position":1},"title":"\u2018Duty to care\u2019 covers the duty to not provide misleading information which may foreseeably cause physical injury","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 20, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"United Kingdom Supreme Court: A five-judge bench comprising of Lady Hale, Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lord Hodge, and Lord Lloyd-Jones while hearing an appeal pertaining to breach of duty held that the scope of the duty of care of a hospital extends to not providing misleading information. The appellant was\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/07\/DSC_7472-2-e1476682323502.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":215809,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/16\/sebi-dr-prannoy-roy-chairman-and-radhika-roy-md-of-ndtv-guilty-of-committing-fraud-barred-from-accessing-securities-market-for-2-years\/","url_meta":{"origin":223753,"position":2},"title":"SEBI | Dr Prannoy Roy, Chairman and Radhika Roy, MD of NDTV guilty of committing fraud, barred from accessing securities market for 2 years","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 16, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI): S.K. Mohanty, Whole Time Member, passed an order finding the promoters of New Delhi Television Ltd. (\u201cNDTV\u201d) \u00a0Dr Prannoy Roy, Chairman (\u201cNoticee 2\u201d), Radhika Roy, Managing Director (\u201cNoticee 3\u201d) and RRPR Holdings (P) Ltd. (\u201cNoticee 1\u201d) \u00a0grossly violated the provisions of Section 12-A(a),\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":271254,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/05\/sat-shareholders-can-ratify-directors-breach-of-duty-through-a-special-resolution\/","url_meta":{"origin":223753,"position":3},"title":"SAT| Shareholders can ratify Director’s Breach of Duty through a special resolution","author":"Editor","date":"August 5, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Securities Appellant Tribunal, Mumbai: The Bench of Tarun Agarwala, J., Presiding Officer, and Meera Swarup, Technical Member, while allowing the appeals held that the shareholders of the company by passing a Special Resolution can ratify the Director's Breach of Duty. Background of the case The Appellant, Terrascope Ventures Ltd., previously\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"SAT","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-401.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-401.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-401.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-401.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-401.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":270373,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/20\/jharkhand-high-court-criminal-proceedings-against-directors-cannot-continue-when-the-company-has-not-been-arrayed-as-a-party\/","url_meta":{"origin":223753,"position":4},"title":"Jharkhand High Court | Criminal proceedings against Directors cannot continue when the Company has not been arrayed as a party","author":"Editor","date":"July 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Jharkhand High Court: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J., quashed the criminal proceeding registered under Sections 420, 406, 34, 120-B of the Penal Code on the ground that only the directors of the company were made accused in the FIR and not the Company. There was no mention of the bad intentions\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Jharkhand High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/jharkhand_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/jharkhand_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/jharkhand_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/jharkhand_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/07\/jharkhand_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":213955,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/25\/checklist-for-loans-and-investments-by-company\/","url_meta":{"origin":223753,"position":5},"title":"Checklist for Loans and Investments by Company [PL Archives]","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 25, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Gaurav N Pingle, Practising Company Secretary, Pune Cite as: (2019) PL (CSP) February 78","rel":"","context":"In "Practical Lawyer Archives"","block_context":{"text":"Practical Lawyer Archives","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/practical-lawyer-archives\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/loan-and-investment_checklist.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/loan-and-investment_checklist.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/loan-and-investment_checklist.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/loan-and-investment_checklist.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/loan-and-investment_checklist.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223753","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=223753"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223753\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/56741"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=223753"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=223753"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=223753"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}