Bank Collections and Payment Transactions: Comparative Study of Legal Aspects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a study of the law governing the bank-customer relationship pertaining to the disposition of funds by cheques and credit transfers, covering both paper-based and electronic payments. The work addresses, with various degrees of detail, common law, civilian, and `mixed' jurisdictions, particularly, Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Switzerland and the United States. In addition to the description of the law in these jurisdictions, the book contains an in-depth analysis of the common issues and the responses to them, in light of desired policies. Accordingly, an evaluation of the various rules and proposals for reform are integral parts of the study.\nThe book is divided into four parts. Part I is an overview of the various legal systems and fundamentals in banking and payment law, in an overall historical context. Part II deals with the banking relationship, within which collections and payments occur. It highlights the customer contract, the deposit transaction, the mandate authorizing bank collections and payments, and the debt resulting from entries to the current account. Part III covers the performance of the mandate. It discusses extensively laws governing the payment and collection of cheques and credit transfers, in the context of actual clearing and settlement mechanisms, particularly large-value transfer systems in developed countries. Part IV is on payment systems misuse through fraud, either in the initiation payments or in misdirecting them. It discusses cheque forgery, unauthorized electronic funds transfers, forged cheques indorsements, and misdirected funds transfers.\nA unique feature of the work is the integration of a cohesive analytic perspective, both doctrinal and policy-oriented, into a comparative descriptive framework. The book searches for a universal `law merchant' transcending the boundaries of the various legal systems. It is aimed at the banking and payment law specialist and student as well as to the general comparative lawyer. Its focus on both present law and reform makes it useful to both the academic and practising lawyer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".