The case is very interesting because it has the merit to recall and clarify the duties charged to the bank for access and management accounts via the Internet website of the bank.
In this case, an officer of the RATP had formed over many years an employee savings through a payroll savings account "Tick Savings" administered by an agreement between his employer and Natixis. On September 15, 2006, she has a flow rate of the sum of 13,244.85 euros of its time account for the benefit of the bank account of her husband with whom she was divorcing.
The account holder then decided to take legal action against the bank for repayment of the amount debited without her consent by her husband. By court dated February 10, 2009, the District Court of Asnieres dismissing the account holder of all of his claims and ordered to pay 400 euros at Natixis under Article 700. She decided to appeal.
Before the Court of Appeal of Versailles, judges have a different analysis of the case. Firstly, the magistrates dismiss the application of section 1421 of the Civil Code allows for both spouses in common property to administer the common property. This article was cited by Natixis and thus allowed to consider that the transfer order had all the appearances of an order made by the account holder or at least with his consent.
But the Court of Appeal of Versailles, " the duty of non-interference in the affairs of the bank customer is not at issue here, Ms. X basing its action on non-infringement by the company NATIXIS a duty to control or warning, but on the safety obligation owed by all banks impose on customers manage computer on the Internet, their accounts .
And the Court of Appeal did not hesitate. She recalls that as well:
"in the first instance, an investor who wanted to consult its online accounts on the website of the company respondent could access their secure area by entering its ID number such as enterprise and server code that were included on transcripts sent to the owner as an individual, then the user must necessarily, if wanted to do something, use a password, thus the performance of any transaction such as request for reimbursement of available assets or transfer requests, required the use by saving the password, that we let him create for himself during his first login.
Thus, for judges " the use of corporate savings account without the knowledge of the licensee, including her husband, with whom she was then divorcing, then still possible, while others close enough for Mrs. X come into possession of his statements had to create itself a first password to get possession of amounts not blocked which were deposited on the latter .
also notes that judges " the modification to the procedure from 3 November 2006 was to make it mandatory for consultation including accounts, use the personal password, which could not be created at will by the owner, but was submitted by the bank to the account holder by mail separate from coded identifier, that is the bank that creates Now the original password, the client then changes it wants .
Thus, the Court of Appeal concluded that " the intervention of this amendment shows that the company had Interépargne NATIXIS well aware that in a first time online management of individual accounts of its customers, it did not meet fully its obligation of safety and security operations so IT management of these accounts .
The Court of Appeal of Versailles therefore condemns the bank to reimburse the account holder half the amount fraudulently charged by its Husband (corresponding to the height of the sums due to him after the divorce) and 1,500 euros in respect of Article 700 CPC.
Source: CA Versailles, 18 November 2010, X v. Natixis SA Interépargne (unpublished)
Author: Benoit Tabaka - http://tabaka.blogspot.com 
0 comments:
Post a Comment