On The Legal Relation And The Civil Legal Liability Of Self-service Deposit

With rapid development of commodity economy and modern technology, thepresent deposit service usually uses the form of self-service deposit. The emergenceof self-service deposit makes the original deposit process which is in the form ofmanual work more convenient and private, and also makes the management oflocation easier and cheaper. However, at the same time, the popularity of self-servicedeposit also brings about some problems. The loss of objects in self-service depositcabinets happens from time to time. It is difficult to quickly solve the disputes causedby the loss of objects, so people always turn to judicial judgment. The substantialcause of this phenomenon is that the core legal issues of self-service deposit haven’tbeen cleared yet.In Chapter Ⅰ of this article, two core legal issues of self-service deposit arepresented:1. What kind of legal relation does the two sides of self-service deposithave between them?2. If the objects in self-service deposit cabinets were lost ordamaged, would the side of location bear the civil legal liability?As to these two core legal issues, in chapter Ⅱ, the legal relation betweencollateral obligation and self-service deposit, and the legal relation between accessoryobligation and self-service deposit have been discussed. One opinion is that the sideof location should bear the custodial obligation to take care of the objects in self-service deposit cabinets in the name of collateral obligation. As to this opinion,the article makes an analysis from the following aspects: the specific forms ofcollateral obligation; the original basis of collateral obligation; the limitation of thisopinion. After that, the article comes to a conclusion that the side of location can’t bedemanded to bear the custodial obligation in the name of collateral obligation. Plus,considering the tight relation between collateral obligation and accessory obligation,the article also makes an analysis on the legal relation between accessory obligationand self-service deposit from the following aspects: the occurance reason of accessoryobligation; the characteristics of accessory obligation. After that, the article comes to aconclusion that the side of location can’t be demanded to bear the custodial obligationin the name of accessory obligation.After confirming that the side of location can’t be demanded to bear the custodialobligation in the name of collateral obligation or accessory obligation, the maincontractual relation in self-service deposit has been discussed in Chapter Ⅲ from thefollowing aspects: the theory of declaration of intention; the elements of contractforming; contract interpretation; the legal principle of delivery. Finally, the articlecomes to a conclusion that the main contractual relation in self-service deposit is thecontract of commodatum on the self-service deposit cabinets. In addition, the articlecomes to a conclusion from analysis that the side of location can avoid bearing thelegal liability caused by the loss or damage of the objects, as long as they fulfill someduties.In Chapter Ⅳ, the legal relation between the Liability of the Location Ownerand self-service deposit has been discussed. One opinion is that the owner of locationshould bear the Liability of the Location Owner to the objects in self-service depositcabinets. Chapter Ⅳ divides the Liability of the Location Owner into two parts: thetraditional Liability of the Location Owner and the Safety Guarantee Obligations inour country. The relation between the traditional Liability of the Location Owner andself-service deposit has been discussed from the location range and a key element ofthe traditional Liability of the Location Owner. In addition, the relation between theSafety Guarantee Obligations in our country and self-service deposit has been discussed from the coverage, the criteria and the content of the Safety GuaranteeObligations in our country. Finally, the article comes to a conclusion that the side oflocation can’t be demanded to bear the custodial obligation in the name of thetraditional Liability of the Location Owner or the Safety Guarantee Obligations in ourcountry.