James and another (Appellants) v HSBC UK Bank Plc (Respondent)

Permission to Appeal application lodged

Case summary
Permission to Appeal
Previous proceedings

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2026/0150

Parties

Appellant(s)

(1) Mark Wolfe James (2) Sian Caroline James

Respondent(s)

HSBC UK Bank PLC

Issue

The level of knowledge for a plaintiff to be considered to have “discovered” fraud under section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980.

Facts

Mr and Mrs James (“the Appellants”) were customers of HSBC. In September 2004 HSBC opened a new account in the name of Mrs James. This was a loan account (“the Loan account”) which initially showed a debit of £49,000 lent to Mrs James. The Appellants’ case is that she never took out such a loan, and that they knew nothing about the Loan account until 2010 when they attempted to remortgage their home. Money was debited from the Appellants’ other accounts, including over £25,000 from their joint account to reduce the amount of the (ostensible) loan to Mrs James. The Appellants made two subject access requests to obtain information about the creation of the Loan Account (in 2013 and 2016), but the opening bank statement was not disclosed. The Appellants note that limited information was provided in 2013. More substantial information was provided in 2016, including a Credit Approval and Risk Management Report (“CARM report”). The Appellants instructed a forensic accountancy expert who analysed the documentation provided under the SAR. In April 2018 the expert concluded that the account had probably been set up fraudulently. In their Particulars of Claim, the Appellants noted that they did not discover fraud until they received this report. The substantive claim was struck out by the High Court in October 2023. In July 2024 Judge refused the Appellants’ application to reopen that judgment under the AIC (i.e. Barrell) jurisdiction. The High Court Judge considered that in 2013 the Appellants had sufficient information to have “discovered” the fraud under s. 32 of the Limitation Act 1980. Therefore, the Judge considered that time started to run for a cause of action based on fraud in 2013 and the claim was statute barred. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on 17 February 2026. N.B. This application for permission to appeal was filed out of time and is subject to an extension of time application.