QUESTION $5$;The relevant legislation for this case would be the National Payment System Act $2021.$ The court would have taken into account the below mentioned sections from the stated act for this Case scenario.Section $16,$ states that each operator of a system must make rules for the governance. Management, and operation of the system, including rules for $($a$)$ access, $($b$)$ the management of liquidity, credit and settlement risks, $($c$)$ the rights and obligations of the operator of the system and the participants on the system, $($d$)$ determining when a payment instruction and a settlement is final, $($e$)$ contingency arrangements and operational risk; and $($f$)$ corporate governance. Section $51(1),$ states that any customer whose financial transaction is routed through a payment system may, if the customer is aggrieved, lodge a written complaint with the customer$$s paymentservice provider. Further subsection $2$ states that a payment service provider that receives a complaint under subsection $(1),($a$)$ may request any information related to the customer$$s financial transaction from the Reserve Bank or another participant, and $($b$)$ must address the customer$$s grievance in accordance with the relevant complaints management policy.Section $52,$ states that any dispute by an operator of a system, participant or payment service provider concerning any matter arising under this Act must be submitted to arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration Act $1995.($Arbitration is a procedure in which dispute is submitted, by agreement of the parties, to one or more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the dispute. This is a private dispute resolution procedure rather than going to court$)$