Can a cheque be recalled if the bank subsequently discovered that the customer’s account was overdrawn?

An often-cited case, Chambers v. Miller et al. (1862), 13 C.B.N.S. 125, 143 E.R. 50, dealing with the effect of the presentation of the cheque and its payment, held that upon payment the property in the notes and money passed from the bankers to the bearer of the cheque and could not be revoked. In this case, Byles J. at p. 52 stated in the course of argument: “I do not remember any case where it has been held that the payment of a cheque can be recalled by reason of the banker subsequently discovering that the customer’s account was overdrawn.” and Erle C.J. stated at p. 53 as follows: “With regard to cheques, the well-known course of business is this, — When a cheque is presented at the counter of a banker, the banker has authority on the part of his customer to pay the amount therein specified on his account. The money in the banker’s hands is his own money. On presentment of the cheque, it is for the banker to consider whether the state of the account between him and his customer will justify him in passing the property in the money to the holder of the cheque . . . But, according to the intention of the parties, and the course of business, the money had ceased to be the money of the bankers, and had become that of the party presenting the cheque . . . The bankers’ clerk chose to pay the cheque; and the moment the person presenting the cheque put his hand upon the money it became irrevocably his.”