银行卡存款冒领案中银行民事责任问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-06 20:41

本文选题：储蓄合同　切入点：银行责任　出处：《南昌大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：经济的发展促进了银行业的繁荣,带来了银行卡数量的飞涨,相应地也带来了银行卡纠纷的日益增多,而其中最常见当属银行卡存款冒领案件。对于这类案件中银行责任的认定与分配,相关法律缺乏明确规定,司法实践也没有统一的裁判标准。这种状况既不符合持卡人利益保护的期待,也不能满足银行对商誉保护的渴求,更不利于对国家金融安全的维护。针对这种理论的不足与立法的不明,需要在既有理论的基础上,综合外域经验进行补足。本文在对储蓄合同法律关系进行详细地分析后认为,首先,对于存款合同的性质不必太过纠结,而应更加关注具体权利义务的设置,方能更好地保护持卡人的利益,同时更具操作性;其次,银行卡存款的所有权应当归属于银行,持卡人对此享有债权,而银行享有存款使用权,同时负有支付义务、审慎义务及安全保障义务;再次,就存款冒领案件中银行责任的性质而言,可能形成违约责任与侵权责任的竞合,但综合评判来说,违约责任对于持卡人具有全面优势;此外,违约责任之下,持卡人可能陷于实际举证不能的尴尬境地,为适度倾斜保护持卡人的合法权益,应当对此项下的举证责任制度做相应的技术性处理,实行举证责任倒置,由银行自证其无过错;最后,针对现状的不足,本文提出了一些改进的建议措施,例如于合同法中明确规定储蓄合同,设立最高责任限额制度等,希冀能够对问题的解决有所裨益。
[Abstract]:The development of economy has promoted the prosperity of the banking industry, brought about the soaring number of bank cards, and accordingly brought the increasing number of disputes about bank cards, and the most common of them is the bank card deposit fraud cases.For the confirmation and distribution of bank responsibility in this kind of cases, the relevant laws are lack of clear provisions, and there is no uniform standard of adjudication in judicial practice.This situation is not in line with the interests of cardholders, nor can it satisfy the banks' desire for goodwill protection, and it is not conducive to the maintenance of national financial security.In view of the deficiency of this theory and the unclear legislation, it is necessary to make up for the outland experience on the basis of the existing theory.After the detailed analysis of the legal relationship of savings contracts, this paper holds that, first of all, the nature of deposit contracts should not be too entangled, but should pay more attention to the establishment of specific rights and obligations in order to better protect the interests of cardholders.Second, the ownership of bank card deposits should belong to the bank, for which the cardholder has claims, and the bank has the right to use the deposit, at the same time, it has the obligation of payment, the obligation of prudence and the obligation of safety and security.As far as the nature of bank liability in the case of deposit taking is concerned, there may be a competition between the liability for breach of contract and the liability for tort. However, the liability for breach of contract has an overall advantage for the cardholder in a comprehensive judgment; in addition, under the liability for breach of contract,In order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the cardholder in order to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the cardholder, the cardholder may be trapped in an awkward position where the burden of proof can not be proved. The system of the burden of proof under this item should be dealt with in a corresponding technical manner, and the burden of proof shall be reversed, and the bank shall prove itself without fault;Finally, in view of the deficiency of the present situation, this paper puts forward some suggestions for improvement, such as the explicit stipulation of savings contract in the contract law, the establishment of the maximum liability limit system, and so on, in the hope that it will be helpful to solve the problem.
【学位授予单位】：南昌大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923;D922.281

【相似文献】