The Clearing House (TCH) filed an amicus brief in support of Deutsche Bank’s appeal to the Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court in Receivers of Sabena, S.A. v. Deutsche Bank AG. In this case, the bank had blocked a funds transfer under OFAC’s sanctions against Sudan. After the block was lifted, Deutsche Bank returned the funds to the bank that had sent the payment order, but Sabena, the beneficiary of the funds transfer, sued claiming that in these cases the funds transfer is merely interrupted and once the block is lifted should be sent on to the beneficiary; the trial court agreed. TCH filed a brief arguing that the Uniform Commercial Code is clear that a funds-transfer payment order that has not been accepted by an intermediary bank after 5 days is cancelled and that the amount of the funds transfer must be returned to the sending bank; Deutsche Bank therefore acted properly in this case. Precedents that state the contrary are distinguishable or wrong and should not be followed by the Appellate Division.
You Might Also Be Interested In...
Amicus Briefs BPI, Trades File Brief Supporting BofA Argument that National Law Preempts N.Y. Mortgage Escrow Rate Requirements
Amicus Briefs BPI, Joint Trades File Amici Brief in Goldman Shareholder Class Action Case Before SCOTUS
Consumer Affairs BPI Files Joint Amici Brief With Other Trades in California v. OCC Case on the OCC’s ‘Madden Fix’ Regulation
Amicus Briefs BPI Submits Amicus Brief in Hymes v. Bank of America National Bank Act Preemption Case
Amicus Briefs BPI Files Amicus Brief on Applicability of HOLA Preemption to Successor Banks in McShannock v. JP Morgan Chase
More Posts by This Author
Bank Capital and Stress Testing BPI Response to Federal Reserve Vice Chair Barr’s Statements on Bank Capital Requirements
Supervision & Enforcement FDIC’s Proposed Changes to Supervisory Appeals System Fall Short of Progress
Supervision & Enforcement BPI and Trade Coalition Comment on FDIC Guidelines for Appeals of Material Supervisory Determinations