| In the field of civil law, the right of cash money applies the same principle as the real right of movables, and "possession that is all" plays only a limited role as a constructive rule. Deposit money is the obligatory right enjoyed by the creditor against the bank in accordance with the deposit contract, which also has the function of payment and settlement as cash money. Hence, many scholars and courts apply the rule of cash money, namely "possession that is all", to deposit money to solve the problems relating the identification of the right attribution and the restitution of deposit money. A series of judicial cases in which the "possession that is all" rule is applied to settle disputes in judicial practice can be categorized into three types:lending accounts disputes, false transfer of accounts disputes and special deposit accounts disputes. The problems in all the above-mentioned types of case can be solved without applying the "possession that is all" rule. In cases where someone borrows others' accounts for depositing money, the real owner of the bank account can be taken as the obligee of deposit money. The original obligee can't claim for restitution of property. In cases where the payer transfers money to a wrong account by mistake, he or she should have the right to claim for the return of unjust enrichment, because the beneficiary acquires others' property without legal basis. With regard to margin money and clients' securities transactions settlement funds in financial transactions, the right attribution of deposit money should be defined according to whether the account is specified or not. The right attribution and restitution of deposit money should be defined not uniformly, but by different types of disputes and the corresponding rules. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号