银行卡纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
本期双语案例推送陈辉诉中国建设银行股份有限公司温岭支行借记卡纠纷案等银行卡纠纷案例。
目录
Contents
1.陈辉诉中国建设银行股份有限公司温岭支行借记卡纠纷案 Chen Hui v. Wenling Sub-Branch of China Construction Bank Co., Ltd. (case regarding debit card disputes) 2. 中国工商银行股份有限公司厦门市分行诉王益民等信用卡透支案 Xiamen Sub-Branch of the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China v. Wang Yimin, et al. (case regarding dispute over credit card overdraft) 3.唐红旺诉中国工商银行股份有限公司天津兰州道支行储蓄存款案 Tang Hongwang v. Tianjin Lanzhou Road Sub-branch of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Company Limited (case regarding dispute over savings)
一、陈辉诉中国建设银行股份有限公司温岭支行借记卡纠纷案
【裁判要旨】
持卡人与发卡银行之间系储蓄存款合同关系，根据“存款自愿，取款自由，存款有息，为储户保密”的原则，发卡行在吸收存款、发放贷款的金融活动中，应当全面履行为储户保密的义务，保障储户的存款安全。若发卡行未能有效履行该义务，导致持卡人遭受损失的，则应当承担返还持卡人被支取的款项及相应手续费的违约责任。因此，在持卡人无过错的情况下，银行卡遭受异地支取的，应由发卡行承担上述违约责任。
[Judgment Abstract]
The bank card holders and the issuing banks maintain a relationship governed by the contract of savings deposit. Based on the principles of “voluntariness in depositing, freedom of withdrawal, interest on every deposit and keeping secret for depositors,” the issuing banks, in the financial activities of taking deposits and making loans, should faithfully perform their obligations to keep secrets for depositors and guarantee the security of their savings. If an issuing bank fails to perform such obligations to the extent that the card holders suffer any loss, such bank should assume the default liability that it should return to the bank card holders the amount of money already withdrawn plus the corresponding service charges. Therefore, where the savings of a bank card holder are withdrawn by others from other places for which the card holder has no fault, the issuing bank should assume the aforesaid default liability.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.6823121
[CLI Code] CLI.C.6823121(EN)
二、中国工商银行股份有限公司厦门市分行诉王益民等信用卡透支案
Xiamen Sub-Branch of the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China v. Wang Yimin, et al. (case regarding dispute over credit card overdraft)
【裁判摘要】
根据我国《合同法》的相关规定，借款人应当按照约定的期限返还借款，未按照约定的期限返还借款的，应当按照约定或者国家有关规定支付逾期利息。持卡人申办信用卡后透支，未按规定及时归还透支金额和利息的，构成违约，持卡人应依法承担违约责任。根据《担保法》第十八条之规定，合同约定承担连带保证责任的保证人应当对持卡人的透支金额及利息承担连带保证责任，即债权人可以要求债务人履行债务，也可以要求保证人在其保证范围内承担保证责任。但是，保证人的这种保证责任不是无限的，其只对持卡人在将来一定期间内的信用卡透支债务承担保证责任。对于持卡人在担保期间和担保数额之外的透支债务，则无须承担保证责任。所以，在信用卡连带保证合同纠纷中，保证人只对持卡人在担保期限和担保数额范围内的信用卡透支债务承担连带保证责任。
[Judgment Abstract]
In accordance with the Contract Law, a borrower should repay the loan within the agreed time limit; otherwise, he should pay delayed repayment interest pursuant to the contract or the relevant provisions of the State. Where a cardholder, after applying for a credit card, overdraws and fails to repay the overdraft amount and the interest payable in a timely manner pursuant to relevant provisions, a breach of contract is constituted, as a result of which the cardholder should bear the liability for breach of contract pursuant to law. In accordance with Article 18 of the Security Law, a guarantor who agrees in a contract to undertake joint guarantee liability should assume joint guarantee liability for the overdraft amount and the interest incurred by the cardholder. Accordingly, the creditor may request the debtor to perform the obligation, or request the guarantor to assume guarantee liability to the extent of his guarantee. However, instead of assuming unlimited liability, the guarantor should only bear guarantee liability for the debts incurred by the cardholder from credit card overdraft within a certain period in the future. The guarantor should assume no liability for overdraft debts incurred by the cardholder beyond the guarantee period or the amount not guaranteed. Therefore, in a dispute concerning a joint guarantee contract for credit card debts, the guarantor should only assume joint guarantee liability for the debts arising from credit card overdraft within the guarantee period and to the extent of the guaranteed amount.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.385273
[CLI Code] CLI.C.385273(EN)
三、唐红旺诉中国工商银行股份有限公司天津兰州道支行储蓄存款案
Tang Hongwang v. Tianjin Lanzhou Road Sub-branch of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Company Limited (case regarding dispute over savings)
【裁判要旨】
银行和储户之间属于储蓄合同法律关系。自动取款机是银行柜台服务的延伸，银行应当保障自动取款机安全运行，并对取款机进行实时监控和维护。储户作为合同的另一方当事人，也应履行谨慎注意的合同义务，即了解银行相关业务的操作提示，对不法行为具备必要的谨慎度。因此，犯罪嫌疑人通过使自动取款机无法正常工作，导致取款人按照犯罪嫌疑人的指示操作并造成存款损失的，因为银行疏于对自动取款机的监控和维护，未能尽到保障交易安全的合同义务，因此其存在一定程度的过错，应当承担赔偿责任。但是，如果取款人没有尽到通常的谨慎注意义务，那么其也应当按照过错大小承担相应的责任。
[Judgment Abstract]
The relationship between a bank and a depositor is a contractual legal savings relationship. ATMs are extensions of bank counter services, so therefore, a bank should ensure the safe operation of ATMs by monitoring and maintaining the ATMs in real time. A depositor, as the other party to the contract, should also perform the duty of care of the contractual obligations, which is to understand the operating instructions of bank-related business, and have the necessary caution against illegal acts. Therefore, if a criminal suspect makes an ATM work abnormally, causing a withdrawer to follow the suspect's instructions and subsequently lose deposits, because the bank is negligent in monitoring and maintaining the ATM and fails to fulfill the contractual obligations of transaction security, the bank has certain faults and should bear liability for compensation. However, where the withdrawer fails to perform the usual duty of care, they should also bear the corresponding responsibility according to their faults.
【法宝引证码】CLI.C.873836
[CLI Code] CLI.C.873836(EN)
北京北大英华
科技有限公司
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
PKULaw
Chinalawinfo
-END-
最高人民法院公报案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例
无因管理类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
质押合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
知识产权类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
租赁合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
技术合同类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
票据类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例商业秘密类型案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉港澳台案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例证券案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉外商事案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
物权案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例最高院公报案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
涉垄断类案件汇编 | 法宝双语案例
点击相应图片识别二维码
获取更多信息
北大法宝
北大法律信息网
法宝学堂
法宝智能