The definition of a
(non-cash) payment instrument is unsatisfactory because it is beside the point is to state that only the legitimate holder is enabled to obtain money or value. The point is, rather, that the
payment instrument also enables the illegitimate holder to obtain money or value. If, in defining the
payment instrument, we were in fact to settle for the legitimacy of its ownership, then a stolen credit card, for example, with which an unauthorised person was able to withdraw cash, would no longer be a
payment instrument and would no longer fall
...[+++] within the regulatory scope of this joint action.