
The European Court of Justice strengthens consumer protection in the event of online banking fraud through phishing
AI-generated summary
The ECJ dealt with a case from Poland in which a bank customer lost 700 euros through phishing and the bank refused the refund due to alleged gross negligence.
The payment service provider can then claim back the losses from customers that were due to gross negligence, according to a statement from the Court of Justice in Luxembourg.
Polish bank customer sued
The background was a case from Poland in which a bank customer fell victim to a phishing scam. The woman had offered an item on an online sales platform. A fraudster posed as a prospective buyer and sent her a link that supposedly came from the platform and was supposed to confirm the sale. The woman followed the link and ended up on a website that looked like her bank's. There she entered her access data for online banking. In fact, the perpetrator got hold of your data and transferred around 700 euros to his own account.
The customer reported the incident to her bank the next day. However, the institute refused a refund: the woman had made the fraud possible through gross negligence. The customer went to a Polish court, which referred the case to the ECJ for clarification.
According to an expert from the Federal Association of Consumer Organizations (VZBV), a similar practice can be observed in Germany as in the Polish case. This means that consumers have to invest a lot of effort in dealing with their payment service providers, give up or accept unfavorable comparison offers. In addition, people shy away from legal action to obtain reimbursement due to the risk of legal costs.
The Luxembourg judges are now making it clear: Banks must immediately reimburse amounts from such transactions if customers inform them in good time. There is only one exception under EU law: if there are reasons to suspect that those affected are committing fraud themselves and the bank informs the responsible national authority of this in writing. The Court referred to the aim of ensuring a high level of consumer protection.
Anton Frank is currently telling the story of how he lost 80,000 euros. Then, once again, "Mrs. Bartosh" answers: "Perhaps you have portfolios that you can liquidate?" You can read more about the anatomy of investment fraud here.
The Berlin administrative court has decided that a high school can ban demonstrative prayers. The court rated the protection of school peace higher than individual religious freedom, even though Muslim students were discriminated against.

The European Court of Justice has ruled that banks must generally refund the amount immediately in the event of unauthorized payment transactions. The bank cannot refuse reimbursement across the board on the grounds of gross negligence.

The Cologne district court has convicted Snap Group Limited of data protection and child protection violations by the AI chatbot “My AI”. The court criticized the inadmissible data processing and the showing of advertising for alcohol and gambling to minors.

According to the ECJ ruling, banks must immediately reimburse victims of account fraud, even if they are accused of gross negligence. A refund is possible subsequently, unless the customer suspects fraud.

Since midnight, the consumption of alcohol has been banned at all train stations in Germany, with the exception of restaurants within the train stations. The railway relies on a sense of proportion and sensitivity when checking, although violations can, in the worst case, result in a ban from the premises. The ban applies every day, including on days with major events such as Bundesliga games.

The Celle Higher Regional Court has declared the liability settlement between Volkswagen and former Audi boss Rupert Stadler from the emissions scandal to be invalid because shareholders were not sufficiently informed about Stadler's financial circumstances. Volkswagen is not announcing the decision and is considering legal remedies while a new settlement is negotiated.