E-negotiable Instrument; who is the Right Holder in Due Course (E-market Moral Limits Considerations)

Business law and the whole law industry are having a total adjustment since the dependence of business and trade in e-commerce.   Transactions are being transmitted online, were by some internet computer lapses are expected in a higher percentage granting that internet business transactions are still in its infancy. 

Referring to the second idea of the title of this article, the right holder in due course for e-business transactions is so vulnerable to any intrusion and hacking of any given business instruments transacted online.  In order to understand the complexity of the matter, it is but necessary to introduce the real legal meaning of “Holder in Due Course”.  “Holder in Due Course- is a person who has good title to the instrument, paid value for it, acquired it in good faith, and had no notice of certain claims or defenses against payment”.

In a simple business laymen’s term we can conceive that holder in due course is the owner of the check, bank draft, and stock or bond certificate.  In some legal dockets’ or business journal cases, a business dispute in terms of the right person holding in due course is a common but a crucial legal argument.  Take for example the case of Interbank of New York v. Fleet Bank 45 ucc Rep.2d 167 New York Civ. Ct. 2001 were interbank brought legal action against Fleet Bank in the charge of recovering the $3,361.25 paid by Interbank from the account of Mr. Dimittrous Tasoulis. 

The case originated when Mr. Tasoulis ordered a verbal authority to the two communication companies Sprint and Atlantic Mobile, as a result the two communication companies issued a draft to be deposited in Fleet Bank and eventually paid by Interbank.  On the contrary, Mr. Tasoulis denied the issue that he gave a verbal authority; as a result Interbank sued Fleet Bank in response to the denial of Mr. Tasoulis. 

The simple business legal case of Mr. Tasoulis gives as an overview on the importance of legal ownership of commercial papers. As to the legal opinion of cyberlaw, e-payments must be formally certified online to avoid fraudulent cyber misbehavior. Other payment internet platform is introduced already in the market like paypal et al.

Taking into account the idea of Professor Michael J. Sandel in terms of “Moral Limits of the Market”, embracing technological advancement in internet legal communication will allow enhancement to the case of Mr. Tasoulis and the whole universal legal and moral profession.  The world market needs to upgrade the legal system communications to respect the moral and legal evolution of the new e-world market.

Finally, As to my last blog article discussing the RFID implanted to humans, the technology originated and propagated in the market by intel company will soon be realized to every global human citizens, in this case e-payment authorization by the holder in due course will be more legally clear  in terms of online or internet transactions.  The help of human RFID implants is the next technological platform to answer the legal lapses of “who will be the right holder in due course”.