Surety Agreement Traducere

Article 581 of the Code defines a contract of suretyship as an agreement by which a guarantor undertakes to be personally liable to a creditor for the consequences of a debtor`s failure to comply with its obligations. Although a separate section of the code deals specifically with surety contracts, the code does not explicitly define a warranty agreement. As such, the term itself does not mean a single particular type of agreement. Therefore, the main factor to be taken into account in distinguishing between the two types of agreements would be whether the risk is taken regardless of the validity and durability of a debt. If the risk is taken regardless of the validity and application of a debt, this would indicate the existence of a guarantee agreement[4]. In that context, the guarantor would also not be held liable if the underlying debt were not considered valid. On the other hand, a guarantor would nevertheless be held liable in the same situation. In view of the above distinction, the conditions invoked by the debtor may also be invoked by the guarantor, but the guarantor could not benefit from these restrictions[5], since its commitment is considered a separate obligation and is not bound by the underlying obligation of the original debtor. Indeed, it is not only a right, but a duty of the guarantor to assert and argue the obligations that may also be presented by the debtor under Article 591 of the Code. Another consequence of an obligation arising from the liability of a contract of suretyship in the obligation of the underlying debtor is that the guarantor becomes the successor of the creditor up to the amount in which he fulfils the obligation on behalf of the debtor (Article 596 of the Code). On the other hand, the guarantor could appeal to the debtor only if the agreement between him and the debtor so provides. A surety contract and a guarantee contract are granted against the risk of non-performance of an obligation by a third party, and both allow the beneficiary to use the assets of the entity instead of resorting to the collection or liquidation of a given asset.

Security agreements are generally defined as agreements where one third party assumes the risk to which another party is exposed[1]. A more concrete example would be a situation in which a third party assumes the risk resulting from the non-compliance with an obligation by another party[2]. In order to define the scope and limits of “security agreements”, it is also necessary to define what constitutes “security”. A guarantee may be a particular asset that would be encouraged or liquidated if the risk occurred, or it could be the personal obligation of a third party that gives the beneficiary of the guarantee the right to use the assets of the part of the enterprise[3]. In this case, I have to withdraw someone as collateral, just in case. The amendments made by Turkish obligations legislation No. 6098 (“Code”) to guarantee agreements (known in Turkish as “kefalet sözleşmeleri”) have been the subject of heated debate, not only among practitioners but also in public, due to certain changes made by the Code to the procedural requirements of a guarantor, such as.B. the requirement to obtain the consent of the spouse. In this article, we first give a brief overview of what security, warranty and warranty are. Secondly, we analyze the differences between a guarantee contract and a guarantee contract, because our experience shows that these two types of securities are among the most common and important types of securities sought after and received by banks. .

. .

Comments are closed.