LAW

Published on
Malaysian Banking Law — Fiduciary Relationship Between Banker and Customer
Introduction
Although the ordinary banker–customer relationship is generally:
✔ contractual;
✔ debtor–creditor;
there are exceptional situations where:
✔ fiduciary duties arise.
A fiduciary relationship exists where:
one party places trust and confidence in another, and the other party is expected to act loyally and honestly in the first party’s interests.
In banking law, fiduciary duties commonly arise when:
  • the bank acts as financial adviser;
  • the bank acts as trustee;
  • the bank exercises influence over the customer;
  • the bank places itself in a conflict of interest situation.


Meaning of Fiduciary Relationship
A fiduciary relationship is a relationship:
based on trust, loyalty, confidence and good faith.
The fiduciary must:
  • act honestly;
  • avoid conflicts of interest;
  • avoid secret profits;
  • avoid abusing trust;
  • act in the customer’s best interests.


General Banking Position
Ordinarily:
✔ banks are NOT fiduciaries.
This is because banks:
  • are commercial institutions;
  • seek profits;
  • normally deal with customers at arm’s length.
Thus:
✔ ordinary banking transactions usually create:
  • contractual duties;
  • debtor–creditor relationships;
  • duties of care;
but NOT general fiduciary duties.


When Fiduciary Duties Arise
Fiduciary duties may arise where:
  • the bank acts as adviser;
  • the customer relies heavily on the bank’s expertise;
  • the bank manages investments;
  • the bank handles trust property;
  • equity intervenes to prevent unfair advantage.


Bank Acting as Adviser
A fiduciary duty may arise where:
✔ the bank advises customers on investments or financial matters.
This is because:
✔ customers may place trust and confidence in the bank’s advice.


Leading Case
Woods v Martins Bank Ltd
Facts
The bank granted a large overdraft facility to a company.
The bank then advised Woods to invest money into that same company.
However:
✔ the bank would benefit if the company repaid its overdraft using Woods’ investment.


Held
The court held:
✔ the bank breached its fiduciary duty.
Why?
Because:
✔ the bank placed itself in a conflict of interest position.
The bank’s advice was not completely independent since:
✔ the bank had its own financial interest in the transaction.


Principle From Woods v Martins Bank
Where a bank:
  • gives financial advice;
  • gains personal benefit from the advice;
  • fails to disclose conflicts;
the bank may:
✔ breach fiduciary duties.


Duty to Avoid Conflict of Interest
One of the most important fiduciary duties is:
the duty to avoid conflicts of interest.
A fiduciary:
✔ must not place personal interests above the customer’s interests.


Examples of Conflict of Interest
Conflict may arise where:
  • a bank adviser secretly earns commissions;
  • the bank promotes investments benefiting itself;
  • the bank prioritises repayment of its own loans;
  • the bank advises customers in transactions where the bank has competing interests.


Duty to Avoid Secret Profits
A fiduciary must also:
✔ avoid secret profits.
This means:
✔ the bank or adviser cannot secretly benefit from the relationship without disclosure and consent.


Bank Acting as Trustee
Banks may also owe fiduciary duties where:
✔ the bank acts as trustee.
This may involve:
  • express trusts;
  • constructive trusts.


Express Trust
An express trust exists where:
✔ property or funds are intentionally held for another person.


Constructive Trust
A constructive trust may arise where:
✔ equity imposes trust obligations due to wrongdoing, dishonesty or unconscionable conduct.


Example
A bank knowingly assists misuse of trust funds.
The bank may become:
✔ constructive trustee.


Case Showing NO Fiduciary Relationship
RHB Bank Bhd v Kwan Chew Holdings Sdn Bhd
Facts
The bank appointed accountants as co-signatories to company cheques.
The customer argued:
✔ fiduciary duties arose.


Held
The Federal Court held:
✘ no fiduciary relationship existed.
The relationship remained:
✔ commercial and contractual.


Principle
Not every involvement by a bank:
✔ creates fiduciary obligations.
Courts will examine:
  • level of trust;
  • advisory role;
  • degree of reliance;
  • presence of conflicts.


Bank as Agent and Fiduciary Duties
Sometimes banks act:
✔ as agents.
When acting as agents:
✔ fiduciary obligations may arise to some extent.
This includes duties:
  • to avoid conflicts;
  • to avoid secret profits;
  • to act honestly.
However:
✔ ordinary banking agency relationships are usually limited commercial agency relationships rather than full fiduciary relationships.


Modern Banking Concerns
Modern banking creates increasing risks of:
  • conflicts of interest;
  • misuse of confidential information;
  • self-interested financial advice.
This is especially important in:
  • investment banking;
  • wealth management;
  • corporate finance;
  • financial advisory services.
Thus regulators and courts increasingly require:
✔ disclosure;
✔ transparency;
✔ conflict management.


Practical Banking Examples
Example 1 — Fiduciary Relationship Exists
A bank adviser recommends a customer invest in a company.
Unknown to the customer:
✔ the bank heavily financed the company and wants repayment.
The investment fails.
Possible result:
✔ breach of fiduciary duty due to conflict of interest.


Example 2 — No Fiduciary Relationship
A customer independently applies for a housing loan.
The bank merely processes the loan.
Result:
✔ ordinary contractual relationship only;
✘ no fiduciary duty.


Case Scenario
Amir meets a bank investment adviser.
The adviser strongly encourages Amir to invest RM500,000 into a corporation without disclosing that:
✔ the bank itself is financially exposed to that corporation.
Amir relies entirely on the advice and later loses his investment.


Legal Analysis
This situation resembles:
Woods v Martins Bank Ltd
The bank may have breached fiduciary duties because:
  • trust and reliance existed;
  • the bank had a conflict of interest;
  • the bank failed to disclose material information.


Solution
Amir may potentially claim:
  • breach of fiduciary duty;
  • negligence;
  • misrepresentation.
The court may examine:
  • extent of reliance;
  • advisory role;
  • undisclosed conflicts;
  • honesty of the bank.


Critical Analysis
Courts are generally cautious about imposing fiduciary duties on banks because:
✔ banks are commercial institutions;
✔ ordinary banking is profit-oriented.
If broad fiduciary duties were imposed universally:
✔ banking operations would become commercially impractical.
Therefore:
  • ordinary banking relationships remain contractual;
  • fiduciary duties arise only in exceptional situations involving:
    • trust;
    • advisory functions;
    • conflicts of interest;
    • reliance.


Questions for Further Research
  1. Should Malaysian banks owe wider fiduciary duties in investment services?
  2. How far should banks investigate potential conflicts before advising customers?
  3. Should Malaysian law adopt broader “Quincecare” duties for suspicious transactions?
  4. Can artificial intelligence banking advice create fiduciary obligations?
  5. Should fiduciary standards differ between commercial banking and investment banking?


Final Examination Rule
The ordinary banker–customer relationship is generally contractual and debtor–creditor in nature rather than fiduciary. However, fiduciary duties may arise where the bank acts as adviser, trustee or agent in circumstances involving trust, confidence, reliance or conflicts of interest. One of the core fiduciary duties is the duty to avoid conflicts of interest and secret profits, as illustrated in Woods v Martins Bank Ltd.

​
Picture
0 Comments