The Concepts Of The “Principle Of Abstraction” And The “Ordinary Course Of Life” In Practice 2
In an incident that took place years ago;
A jobless young man, living off the allowance he received from his grandmother with whom he lived, dressed someone up in a “deliveryman” uniform, handed them an empty package, and sent them to his grandmother’s home address, instructing them to say, “This package was sent to you from Germany; it contains the medications you’ve been waiting for,” thereby ensuring the delivery of the empty package he had prepared to his grandmother in exchange for her signature…
The elderly woman, upon receiving the package from the “delivery person,” believed she was signing the bottom of the “Delivery Receipt,” but later discovered—only after enforcement proceedings were initiated against her—that she had actually signed the issuance section of a blank promissory note!
In this case, the elderly woman, who found herself in debt, filed a declaratory judgment action through her attorney after being demanded to pay the extremely high amount of the promissory note via enforcement proceedings; she argued that “the defendant-creditor is her grandson, that lending her such a large sum of money is contrary to the normal course of life, and that the defendant-creditor should be cross-examined on this matter,” but—regrettably—this request was not granted by either the local court or the 19th Civil Chamber of the Court of Cassation, and the negative declaration lawsuit she filed was dismissed…