Learning Unit 3 Final
Learning Unit 3 Final
Payment Systems
Lecturer : S Ndlovu
IIE MSA is an educational brand of The Independent Institute of Education (Pty) Ltd which is registered with the Department of Higher Education and Training as a
© 2019 IIE MSA private higher education institution under the Higher Education Act, 1997 (reg. no. 2007/HE07/002). Company Registration number: 1987/004754/07.
CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY
Payment Systems
Take & Save Trading CC & others v The Standard Bank of SA Ltd 2004 (4) SA 1 (SCA)
Cambanis Buildings (Pty) Ltd v Gal 1983 (2) SA 128 (NC)
Barkhuizen v Napier 2007 (5) SA 323 (CC)
Nissan South Africa (Pty) Ltd v Marnitz NO 2005 (1) SA 441 (SCA)
Pestana v Nedbank Limited 2008 (3) SA 466 (W)
Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA)
Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 (ECTA)
Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (POPI Act)
Code of Banking Practice
Schulze, H Countermanding an electronic fund transfer 2004 JBL 84
Schulze, WG E-money and electronic fund transfers. A shortlist of some of the unresolved
issues 2004 SA Merc LJ 50.
Schulze, WG Electronic fund transfers and the bank's right to reverse a credit transfer: one
big step (backwards) for banking law, one huge leap (forward) for potential fraud: Pestana v
Nedbank (act one, scene two) 2008 SA Merc LJ 290.
Schulze, WG of credit cards, unauthorised withdrawals and fraudulent credit cards
users 2005 SA Merc LJ 202
the NPS Act provides the legal framework for the SARB’s management,
administration, operation, regulation and supervision of the payment, clearing
and settlement systems in South Africa.
Sect 10(1)© South African Reserve Bank Act=mandates the Reserve Bank to
establish, operate, oversea and regulate payment, clearing and settlement
systems
South Africa, consumers and businesses have a choice of more than 18 different
payment systems, ranging from low-value card transactions to high-value bond
exchange payments. These payment streams all form part of the NPS and are
managed by the Payments Association of South Africa (PASA), regulated
and overseen by the South African Reserve Bank(SARB).
In April 2019, the Payments Council replaced the National Payment System
Strategy Body. Acting as an advisory body to the SARB, the Payments Council’s.
City Press “Santaco in Eastern Cape to launch a cashless payment system in taxis”
https://www.news24.com/citypress/news/santaco-in-eastern-cape-to-launch-a-cashless-payment-system-for-
taxis-20230831( Assessed 2 September 2023)
Negotiable Instruments
Regulated by Bills of exchange act 34 of 1964.(BEA)
instrument that constitutes an obligation to pay a sum of money and that is
transferable by delivery so that the holder for the time being can sue in his own na
me.
Bill of Exchange
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbMDlJHS1Yw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IlXDDoSYIs&t=18
Stop Order
account holder mandates his bank to pay a fixed amount amount on a regular
bases to a specific 3rd party.
Agreement between you and the bank
Bank fails= can claim damages from the bank, however in practice a claim for
damages is often excluded as the stop order form signed usually contains a
clause in terms of which the mandator wound have no claim if the bank without
fault fails to make payment.
Cambanis Buildings v Gal –nb 211 a stop order DOES NOT create a legal tie
between the account holder and the 3rd party or bank and 3rd party.
Debit Order
Similar to stop order but the debtor also authorizes the 3rd party to request
payment from the debtor’s bank
Agreement between you and a third party. The debit order authorises the
third party to take funds from your account
1. Credit Transfers= when the customer instructs his bank to pay another party.
2. Debit Transfers= the person who needs to be paid requests/claim money from
the bank of the person who owes him.
the transfer is initiated by creditor who instructs his bank to collect payment
and pull funds into his account.
In an EFT, 3
Intermediary
Banks are usually
involved & have Bank
specific duties
Beneficiary Bank
This is bank of a
person being paid by
EFT
NB – in a EFT the bank that effects the payment DOES NOT REPRESENT ITS
CUSTOMER BUT FUNCTIONS AS A MANDATARY
1. Common law duties of the bank
a) Reasonable care and diligence
b) Duty must be exercised with reasonable time
c) Duty must exercised Without negligence
d) Perfome its duties in good faith
e) Must facilitate payment without fraud
f) Ensure that payment is clear and unambiguous- Code of BC
The Code of Banking Practice also imposes specific duties to customers in EFTs,
scan the code below
the difference is that EFTPOS Credit Card Transaction, the card holder MAY chose
to pay outstanding balance in full or instalments BUT with a EFTPOS Debit Card,
constitutes full and immediate payment to the supplier.
Meaning When can a customer decide to cancel/ revoke the EFT before completion
of that EFT?
This principle emanates from the judgment of Take and Save Trading CC and
other v Standard Bank of SA Limited. The Supreme Court of Appeal held that
when a valid transfer is effected by a party into the recipient’s account, the
credit belongs to the recipient and the credit can only be reversed with the
recipient’s consent.
Therefore a Bank may not unilaterally reverse an unconditional credit without
the beneficiary consent.
Read the following article which criticizes the court in this regard: Schulze, WG
Countermanding an electronic funds transfer: The Supreme Court of Appeal
takes a second bite at the cherry (2004) 16 SA Merc LJ 668.
Legal Question?
- Is a bank entitled to reverse funds without client’s consent?
Facts
money transferred from Nissan’s account into a wrong account.
It was not clear who’s fault it was regarding error.
The payee’s estate was liquidated shortly, thereafter withdrawing the
money, fully aware that it had been deposited as a result of a mistake.
Nissan then applied to the court for an order declaring that what was left in
the payee’s account did not form part of the insolvent’s estate.
Legal Question
whether a bank can unilaterally reverse a credit without the consent of the
recipient in such an instance?
And considering that money could not be reversed what recourse did Nissan
have to reclaim the money?
If money is paid through fraud or theft= bank NOT obliged to pay the money to
the customer on demand.
© 2019 IIE MSA
CONFIDENTIAL & PROPRIETARY 84
Hence, the court held that Nissan was entitled to claim from the account holder
that money which he had already withdrawn.
The court was of the view that withdrawing money from one’s account while
knowing fully well that it did not belong to one was similar to theft.
If money is paid through fraud or theft= bank NOT obliged to pay the money to
the customer on demand.
Where money was stolen/erroneously transferred to a person not entitled to
receive it = thief not entitled= money could be reversed without consent of the
receiver.