Private Law Research

Payment Order in Electronic Funds Transfer as Assignment Offer

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Hamid Miri
Mansour Amini
Saman Motaghi Shahri
https://doi.org/10.22054/jplr.2018.9009
Abstract
This article discusses Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) based on an assignment framework.  Payment order in EFT is considered to be an assignment offer. If the Fund Transfer is considered on this basis, it must contain conditions for the emergence of an assignment and its legal consequences. In this respect, debt or credit as subject matter of this agreement is available in most cases of EFT, even if there is no debtor and creditor relationship between the issuer of the payment order and beneficiary. In terms of intent for creation an assignment, since the issuer is willing to transfer funds that is being holding by bank and there is no need for debtor’s consent and there is no fiduciary relationship between them, the legal relationship created between the issuer and the bank has to be interfered as an assignment. As regards consequences, by accepted this idea, the right of the bank to reject Fund Transfer order can easily be interpreted. Having said that, what a bank does on order after receipt of payment order should not be considered to be the acceptance of the offer, because this is a regular and preliminary process. Since the doctrine is not able to respond to some situations for Fund Transfer, including Fund Transfer to another account of the issuer, it has been subject to some criticisms.

Keywords

Fund Transfer
Credit Transfer
Assignment
Consent
Agent
Algudah, Fayyad,The Liability of banks in electronic fund Transfer Transaction: A study in the British and the United States Law, Ph.D Thesis, (the University of Edinburg, 1992)
Brindle, M., & Cox, R, Law of Bank Payments, (London: Sweet & Maxwell,2004)
Ellinger, E. P., Lomnicka, E., & Hare, C,Ellinger's Modern Banking Law, Third Edition, (Oxford University Press‏,2002)
Furmston, M. P., Cheshire, G. C., & Fifoot, C. H. S,Cheshire, Fifoot and Furmston's Law of Contract, 16th Ed, (Oxford University Press, 2012)
Code de Civil
U.K. Property Law Act.
U.S.Uniform Commercial Code.
UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts.
William Brandt’s Sons & Co v. Dunlop Rubber Co; HL 190.
Foley v. Hill, (1848) 2 HLC 28, 9 ER 1002.
Petroleum Co Ltd v Milton [1997] 1 W.L.R. 1060.
 
Private Law Research
Volume 7, Issue 24
Autumn 2018
Pages 173-199

Main Page

Editorial Boards

Guide for Authors

Contact Us