Joachimson v. Swiss Bank Corporation
Rule established
Bank's obligation to repay deposits arises only upon demand by the customer at the branch where the account is maintained
Facts
- Joachimson was a German national who maintained an account with Swiss Bank Corporation's London branch
- During World War I, he could not demand repayment due to enemy alien restrictions
- After the war, he demanded his balance
- The bank argued limitation had expired (more than 6 years since last transaction)
Issue
- Whether a bank's obligation to repay a deposit is immediate (accruing from date of deposit) or conditional upon demand by the customer.
Held
- Atkin LJ held that the banker's obligation to repay is not absolute and immediate upon deposit. It is conditional upon a demand being made by the customer at the branch where the account is kept, during banking hours, in the proper manner. Until such demand is made, no cause of action arises. Therefore, limitation does not run from the date of deposit but from the date of demand.
Ratio Decidendi
The bank's obligation to repay deposits is conditional upon demand by the customer at the branch of account. Without demand, no cause of action arises, and the Limitation Act does not begin to run. This distinguishes the banker-depositor relationship from an ordinary debtor whose debt becomes due on a fixed date.
How to use it in an exam
Essential for questions on: (a) when limitation starts for bank deposits, (b) nature of banker's obligation, (c) place of demand. Key line: "The bank's duty to repay arises only upon demand at the branch of account." Cite together with Foley v. Hill for a complete picture.
Source
Source: King's Bench Reports
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.