Question 98.— A bank in Kingston cashed for a customer, who endorses it, a cheque payable in Sault Ste. Marie, where it has no branch. It sends it to its Toronto branch, which turns it over to a bank having a branch at that point. The cheque is dishonoured and returned through the same channel to Kingston. Can the customer of the Kingston bank claim undue delay (1) in presentment, or (2) in the notice of dishonour?

Answer.—If the cheque was sent forward promptly from Kingston to Toronto, and from Toronto to Sault Ste. Marie, and presented in due course after reaching there, the presentment was, we think, duly made within the terms of subsection 2b of section 45, Bills of Exchange Act (q.v.). We do not think that the customer could complain of delay only because the bank sent the cheque to Toronto instead of sending it to Sault Ste. Marie direct. The only question is whether the delay thereby caused rendered the presentment one not made within a reasonable time, but we think that, having regard to the usage of banks, such a mode of presentment is permissible.

(2) The question suggests that the return of the cheque was relied on to serve as notice of dishonour, and if so the return through the same channel, if each step is within the limit of time allowed by law, would be sufficient. If notice of dishonour had been sent to the customer by the bank at Sault Ste. Marie, delay in returning the cheque would have no effect on the customer's liability.