0370 270 6000

already registered?

Please sign in with your existing account details.

need to register?

Register to access exclusive content, sign up to receive our updates and personalise your experience on brownejacobson.com.

Privacy statement - Terms and conditions

Forgotten your password?

Employer’s liability for providing negligent references

7 August 2014

In Playboy Club London Ltd and others v Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro SPA, the High Court held that a bank was liable for negligently providing a casino with a reference for one of the bank’s customers, stating that he was financially healthy. Relying on that, the casino allowed the customer to become a member and accepted his cheques, which later turned out to be counterfeit. Acceptance of these cheques led to the casino suffering losses of £1.25 million.

It transpired that the customer’s account with the bank had a balance of nil. The bank denied any responsibility as the reference had been provided by an employee who did not have actual authority to do so and had since been dismissed. Despite this, the court found that the bank still was responsible for providing the reference, regardless of the wrongful conduct of the employee. There was nothing informal about the request for or giving of the reference and the court found that there was no reason for the casino to be cautious about receiving a reference from an employee apparently responsible for the customer’s account.

This case demonstrates the caution businesses should take when their employees give out references and that even if wrongly provided, such references can be held to give rise to legal duties on the part of the employer.

Related opinions

Relief for landlords as the Court of Appeal confirms that leases have been validly contracted out

One of the requirements for tenants to contract out of the security of tenure regime contained in the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 is that they make a simple or statutory declaration before entering into the lease.

View blog

Summary judgment stayed where part 26A restructuring plan pending

Landlords should reconsider summary judgment if a Part 26A restructuring plan is pending.

View blog

Landlords’ claims for summary judgment for ‘Covid’ rent arrears succeed (again)

A landlord’s claim for summary judgment to recover rent and service charge arrears accrued since the start of the pandemic against a non-essential retailer succeeded. Like London buses, a second such case has followed hot on its heels.

View blog

The High Court offers no comfort for beleaguered retailers

Whilst this decision may not be surprising, it will undoubtedly send a chill down the spine of retailers in a similar position to The Fragrance Shop.

View blog

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up