检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]西南政法大学民商法学院,重庆401120 [2]株洲市石峰区人民检察院,湖南株洲412005
出 处:《湖南工业大学学报(社会科学版)》2015年第1期77-81,共5页Journal of Hunan University of Technology(Social Science Edition)
摘 要:克隆卡纠纷所涉主体较多且法律关系复杂,尤其是民事责任分担问题,更是争议较多,其中焦点问题是被盗款项的权属问题和责任的具体分担。持卡人与银行之间由于存款而形成债权债务关系,存款由银行取得所有权,并负有对持卡人给付财产的义务。冒领人以克隆卡之信息骗取银行之给付,并不影响持卡人之债权请求,故而银行应对该给付负有责任。当然,如果其能举证持卡人之过错而致银行卡信息泄露,则持卡人亦应承担相应责任。Clone card dispute involves many subjects and has complex legal relationships,especially the issue of civil liability sharing.Among these,the focus problem is the ownership issue and the burden-sharing problem of the stolen money.Here exist claims and liabilities between the cardholder and the bank deposits.Banks obtain the ownership of deposits and have obligations and responsibility to pay the property to the cardholder.The imper-sonator defrauds the bank’s payment by using the clone card information,but it does not affect the cardholder's debt request.Therefore,banks should be responsible for the payment,because the bank did not fulfill the corre-sponding obligation.Of course,if it can be proved that it is the cardholder's fault which has caused the leak of bank card information,the cardholder should assume corresponding responsibilities.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:52.14.184.10