July 5, 1996, the service company for the payment of the purchase price with a food processing unit, the account transfer check issued by the Agricultural Bank of China amounted to 382.20 yuan in Shanghai branch of a (number of IXIII0547631), does not bear the name of the payee on delivery a check. July 7, the check to someone who accused the feed mill to buy feed, this time, the amount of the check for transfer of the case are 7382.20 yuan, and the absence of any endorsement. The defendant feed mills to accept a check the same day, in the endorser and endorsee box cover under his own seal as an endorsement, then the identity of the bearer checks to the Agricultural Bank of China A branch of a place of business, by the firm on the same day through B branch of the Agricultural Bank of China from a place of business services companies plaintiff bank account designated to go 7382.20 yuan, defendant feed mill into account. In the same year by the end of July, when the plaintiff and the bank reconciliation services company, found that a shortage of 7,000 yuan on deposit accounts, by mutual verification, found that the transfer check stub different amounts and have been rewritten. After fruitless negotiations, the plaintiffs service company to court, saying Zhuanzhangzhipiao amounts have been altered, the ticket request is determined invalid, and order the defendant to bear the plaintiff feed mill 7382.20 yuan economic loss; significantly altered trace amount of the check, the two defendants Agricultural Bank Failing to scrutiny, wrongly payments, causing the plaintiff economic losses, should be held accountable. ? The defendant argued that the feed mill: After accept checks by the Finance staff review found no altered or suspicious, but also the normal way by bank receivables, he has no responsibility.
A branch of the Agricultural Bank of China defendant argued that: bank audit procedures for the seal of Zhuanzhangzhipiao are consistent with the date the case is valid and the amount is consistent, audited, in line with the three elements. The situation is inconsistent with the original occurrence stub, bank irresponsible.
The defendant argued that the Agricultural Bank of China branch in B: when the person handling scrutinized ticket, check the amount of capitalization were not altered trace, so he has no responsibility.
In the trial court, the defendant was unable to prove who is the feed mill it before hand, that is, who is the feed buyers, as well as time and tampered with or altered checks. The court held that Zhuanzhangzhipiao feed mill made invalid because the amount was changed, resulting in endorsement discontinuous liability in the feed mill, for which service company to pay the plaintiff 7,000 yuan by the defendants to return the feed mill, the plaintiff in the original check issued The plaintiff shall be obligated 382.20 yuan.
[Investigators Point]
This is a result of the alteration caused Zhuanzhangzhipiao fare refund disputes. The key to deal with such cases relate to the following issues:
1. How to identify the legal effect after the bill has been altered. Notes to the formula securities, it must have the form of Negotiable Instruments provisions of bills otherwise invalid. Notes or securities context, content of the right notes and all matters relating to bills related bills on the subject are recorded, may not matter other than to deny the bill bills context of effectiveness. Therefore, the items mentioned on the bill only to complete and comply with the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments form requirements, and matters described in notes also not free to change, otherwise, to affect the legal validity of the ticket. "Negotiable Instruments" Article 9, paragraph 2, states: "The amount, date, payer name can not be changed, change the notes invalid." Section 14 of the Act states: "recorded on a negotiable instrument shall be true to forge, change made. forged view other items mentioned in the chapter on the altered notes shall bear legal responsibility. There are forged or altered Kam chapter on the bill, the bill does not affect the validity of other real Kam chapter. Other items mentioned on the ticket After figuring before the bill can not be altered or; to be altered, altered Kam chapter before people, responsible for the original items mentioned; Kam chapter of people, responsible for the items mentioned later altered after altering Kam chapter deemed altered before Kam chapter. "Therefore," Negotiable Instruments "for falsified bills of force and responsibility to make clearly defined. Zhuanzhangzhipiao case because the amount is changed and invalid, and therefore, the defendant in this case based on the invalid feed mill holder and made notes on the interest bill is no legal basis, it should be returned for invalid tickets interests acquired. The case should be noted that before Zhuanzhangzhipiao been changed drawer plaintiff company has been in service before the Zhuanzhangzhipiao is changed, the drawer plaintiff company has been in service on the Zhuanzhangzhipiao effective Kam chapter, so it respond transfer the amount of the original record of 382.20 yuan on the check liable.
2. Endorsement discontinuous legal consequences. Endorsement refers to the transfer of rights bill or bills would grant certain rights to be exercised for the purpose of the behavior of matter and the record notes Kam chapter in the bill or allonge on the back. According to "Negotiable Instruments" requirement, "Negotiable Instruments" endorsement of the provisions of the bill also apply to checks. "Negotiable Instruments Law" bill endorsement made on strict rules. Section 31 of the Act provides that: "In endorsing a draft, endorsement should be continuous, the holder of the continuous endorsement to prove their rights to the draft; ECA endorsement, and other lawful means the bill, according to the law of evidence to prove their draft rights. The aforesaid continuous endorsement, it refers to the bill assignor and assignee drafts bill endorsee endorsee chapter in the bill discriminator sequential consistency. "Accordingly, if the endorsement is not continuous, or ticket holder can not prove their access to other lawful means, the rights holder can not be on the bill, debtors may refuse to pay. Zhuanzhangzhipiao feed mill case the defendant made before hand without endorsement, but his cover seal in the endorser and endorsee bar, causing Endorsement discontinuous, it can not be proved by other legal instruments which are legitimate rights holders, So feed mill can not enjoy the right notes, interest on bills which should be fully achieved in return for which the consequences can only assume by themselves.
