Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Mer oaktsam än grovt oaktsam? Om begreppet särskilt klandervärt vid obehöriga transaktioner enligt betaltjänstlagen

Broman, Daniel LU (2023) LAGF03 20231
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
The Swedish Payment Services Act regulates the division of responsibility
between the payment service provider and the consumer in case of fraud that
has resulted in an unauthorized transaction. The paper examines the two most
important degrees of negligence, which are found in the 5 a chapter, section
3 of the act, and compares them. These degrees are gross negligence, where
the consumer is responsible up to 12 000 kr and particularly culpable, with
full responsibility for the economic loss the fraud may have resulted in. The
paper showsthat these two degrees of negligence share certain characteristics.
The paper, however, concludes that particularly culpable behavior exhibits a
higher degree of negligence and is more... (More)
The Swedish Payment Services Act regulates the division of responsibility
between the payment service provider and the consumer in case of fraud that
has resulted in an unauthorized transaction. The paper examines the two most
important degrees of negligence, which are found in the 5 a chapter, section
3 of the act, and compares them. These degrees are gross negligence, where
the consumer is responsible up to 12 000 kr and particularly culpable, with
full responsibility for the economic loss the fraud may have resulted in. The
paper showsthat these two degrees of negligence share certain characteristics.
The paper, however, concludes that particularly culpable behavior exhibits a
higher degree of negligence and is more strongly associated with indifference,
especially within the context of the act. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has
in the precedent NJA 2022 s .522 affirmed that knowledge of risk of an
unauthorized transaction is not necessary for a behavior to constitute
particularly culpable, as the legal history suggests. Furthermore, the paper
asserts that the negligence assessment in the Payment Service Act appears to
differ from the negligence assessment pertaining to the Tort Liability Act,
although similarities can still be discerned. Unfortunately, the Supreme
Court’s precedent leaves some questions unanswered regarding the
importance of some of these traditional factors of the negligence assessment.
Moreover, the paper concludes that NJA 2022 s. 522 represents a major shift
in the legal position in favor of consumers. Especially regarding the situation
where a consumer hands out his or her personal security credentials to an
unknown person. In most of these cases the consumer, following the ruling
of the Supreme Court, only is considered to have behaved with gross
negligence, in contrast to before the precedent, when the same behavior was
generally considered to be particularly culpable and therefore resulted in full
responsibility for the consumer. Considering that particularly culpable is an
unestablished concept within Swedish civil law that fits poorly into the legal
system in general, the updates in legal position due to the precedent and the
outdated explanations and examples in the legal history, the paper proposes
that the legislator change 5 a chapter, section 3 of the act, to make the
abstractly formulated grades of negligence easier to understand in its context. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
5 a kap. lag (2010:751) om betaltjänster (BTL) reglerar ansvarsfördelningen
mellan betaltjänstleverantörer och kontohavare vid obehöriga transaktioner
till följd av bedrägerier. Uppsatsen undersöker de två viktigaste graderna av
oaktsamhet, som återfinns i 5 a kap. 3 § BTL, och jämför dem. Dessa grader
är grov oaktsamhet, där kontohavaren är ansvarig upp till 12 000 kr och
särskilt klandervärt, där kontohavaren är fullt ansvarig för den ekonomiska
skada som bedrägeriet kan ha resulterat i. Uppsatsen slår fast att dessa två
grader av oaktsamhet har gemensamma kännetecken, men även att ett särskilt
klandervärt agerande uppvisar en större grad oaktsamhet och har en starkare
koppling till likgiltighet, särskilt inom ramen för... (More)
5 a kap. lag (2010:751) om betaltjänster (BTL) reglerar ansvarsfördelningen
mellan betaltjänstleverantörer och kontohavare vid obehöriga transaktioner
till följd av bedrägerier. Uppsatsen undersöker de två viktigaste graderna av
oaktsamhet, som återfinns i 5 a kap. 3 § BTL, och jämför dem. Dessa grader
är grov oaktsamhet, där kontohavaren är ansvarig upp till 12 000 kr och
särskilt klandervärt, där kontohavaren är fullt ansvarig för den ekonomiska
skada som bedrägeriet kan ha resulterat i. Uppsatsen slår fast att dessa två
grader av oaktsamhet har gemensamma kännetecken, men även att ett särskilt
klandervärt agerande uppvisar en större grad oaktsamhet och har en starkare
koppling till likgiltighet, särskilt inom ramen för BTL. I avgörandet NJA
2022 s. 522 har dock Högsta domstolen bekräftat att insikt om risken för en
obehörig transaktion inte är en nödvändig förutsättning för ett särskilt
klandervärt agerande, som förarbetena antyder. Uppsatsen slår även fast att
oaktsamhetsbedömningen enligt 5 a kap. lag (2010:751) betaltjänster på ett
betydande sätt verkar avvika från den fria culpabedömningen kopplad till
skadeståndslagen (1972:207), även om likheter fortfarande kan urskiljas.
Högsta domstolen har i NJA 2022 s. 52 lämnat en del frågor obesvarade
beträffande vikten av vissa av de klassiska culpafaktorerna hänförliga till den
fria culpabedömningen. Därutöver har uppsatsen konkluderat att NJA 2022 s.
522 har inneburit ett stort skifte i rättsläget till fördel för kontohavare. Särskilt
gäller detta i de fallen då kontohavaren har lämnat ut sina personliga koder
till en okänd person. I de allra flesta av dessa fall klassificeras numera detta
agerande av kontohavaren som grovt oaktsamt i stället för särskilt klandervärt
med fullt ansvar, som tidigare var fallet. Slutligen föreslår uppsatsen en
lagändring av 5 a kap. 3 § BTL. Lagrummet bör få en längre och tydligare
utformning för att de abstrakt formulerade graderna av oaktsamhet ska bli
enklare att förstå i dess kontext. Detta med hänsyn till att särskilt klandervärt
är ett oetablerat begrepp inom civilrätten vars innebörd skiljer sig från
förståelsen av begreppet inom andra delar av rättssystemet, rättslägets
förändring i och med NJA 2022 s. 522 samt de föråldrade förklaringarna och
exemplen i förarbetena (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Broman, Daniel LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20231
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
civilrätt, bankrätt, särskilt klandervärt, grov oaktsamhet, betaltjänstlagen
language
Swedish
id
9116509
date added to LUP
2023-06-29 09:26:58
date last changed
2023-06-29 09:26:58
@misc{9116509,
  abstract     = {{The Swedish Payment Services Act regulates the division of responsibility 
between the payment service provider and the consumer in case of fraud that 
has resulted in an unauthorized transaction. The paper examines the two most 
important degrees of negligence, which are found in the 5 a chapter, section 
3 of the act, and compares them. These degrees are gross negligence, where 
the consumer is responsible up to 12 000 kr and particularly culpable, with 
full responsibility for the economic loss the fraud may have resulted in. The 
paper showsthat these two degrees of negligence share certain characteristics.
The paper, however, concludes that particularly culpable behavior exhibits a 
higher degree of negligence and is more strongly associated with indifference, 
especially within the context of the act. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has 
in the precedent NJA 2022 s .522 affirmed that knowledge of risk of an 
unauthorized transaction is not necessary for a behavior to constitute 
particularly culpable, as the legal history suggests. Furthermore, the paper 
asserts that the negligence assessment in the Payment Service Act appears to
differ from the negligence assessment pertaining to the Tort Liability Act, 
although similarities can still be discerned. Unfortunately, the Supreme 
Court’s precedent leaves some questions unanswered regarding the 
importance of some of these traditional factors of the negligence assessment. 
Moreover, the paper concludes that NJA 2022 s. 522 represents a major shift 
in the legal position in favor of consumers. Especially regarding the situation 
where a consumer hands out his or her personal security credentials to an 
unknown person. In most of these cases the consumer, following the ruling 
of the Supreme Court, only is considered to have behaved with gross 
negligence, in contrast to before the precedent, when the same behavior was 
generally considered to be particularly culpable and therefore resulted in full 
responsibility for the consumer. Considering that particularly culpable is an 
unestablished concept within Swedish civil law that fits poorly into the legal 
system in general, the updates in legal position due to the precedent and the 
outdated explanations and examples in the legal history, the paper proposes 
that the legislator change 5 a chapter, section 3 of the act, to make the 
abstractly formulated grades of negligence easier to understand in its context.}},
  author       = {{Broman, Daniel}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Mer oaktsam än grovt oaktsam? Om begreppet särskilt klandervärt vid obehöriga transaktioner enligt betaltjänstlagen}},
  year         = {{2023}},
}