伪卡交易损失的分配原理

A Theory of Loss Allocation for Forged Bank Card Transactions

向债权准占有人进行清偿较为常见的是存款之冒领。具有识别义务却未能识别伪卡的发卡行,在不具有免责事由的情况下对伪卡持有人的清偿不构成向债权准占有人的清偿。这意味着持卡人仍可主张存款合同上的履行请求权,发卡行则需承担伪卡交易的所有损失。我国的司法实务界与域外的立法例之所以选择能以共同过失为由进行抗辩的严格责任为归责原则的损失分配体制,是因为侵权责任法上的请求权基础才有过错的认定空间。然而,发卡行作为存款冒领事故中最节约的成本避免者,由其对伪卡交易损失承担严格责任才是最有效率的选择。如此,请求权基础的不同选择所带来的伪卡交易损失分配的差异亦得以消弭。

The common way of quasi-possession creditor paid off is to pretend the true creditor to withdraw deposits.The bank card issuers,who can't identify the forged bank card with identification duty.Paying to forged bank cardholders wouldn't be regarded as paying the quasi creditor off without exemptions from civil liabilities.This means that cardholders can still perform claims according to deposit contracts,while bank card issuers must bear all the losses of forged bank card transactions.Judicial departments of China and the legislations of other countries have chosen the strict liability imputation principle with defense of contributory negligence of loss allocation system,the reason is that only claims of tort law can cognize subjective faults.Bank card issuers,however,are the least cost avoiders in the accidents of pretending the true creditor to withdraw deposits,and it will be the most effective choice if bank card issuers bear the losses of forged bank card transactions based on the strict liability imputation principle.The difference of loss allocation of forged bank card transactions caused by the choice of claim basis thus also will be eliminated.