Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-30T19:40:03.414Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent Legislative Trends in The Field of Personal Security

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Ulrich Drobnig
Ulrich Drobnig
Affiliation:
Emeritus Professor of Law, University of Hamburg; Emeritus Director, Max Planck Institute for Foreign Private and Private International Law, Hamburg.
Get access

Extract

Personal and proprietary security are the two basic types of instruments for securing credit. In the more frequent and better known case of proprietary security, usually the debtor of the credit offers an asset owned by him to serve as security for the creditor by transferring a limited proprietary right to the creditor. By contrast, in the case of personal security a third person assumes a security obligation vis-à-vis the creditor; potentially he is liable for that obligation – up to its agreed limit – with all his property.

Type
Research Article
Information
European Business Organization Law Review (EBOR) , Volume 2 , Issue 3-4 , September 2001 , pp. 511 - 524
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press and the Authors 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 This uniformity is embodied in the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, 1993 Revision (ICC Publication no. 500).Google Scholar

2 For recent surveys and analyses see especially Lwowski, , Das Recht der Kreditsicherung, 8th ed. (Berlin 2000)Google Scholar, and Bülow, , Recht der Kreditsicherheiten, 5th ed. (Heidelberg 1999).Google Scholar

3 See generally Lohoues-Oble, , “L'apparition d'un droit international des affaires en Afrique”, Rev.int.dr.comp. (1999) 545–591Google Scholar; reports by Agboyibor, , “OHADA: Droit des affaires en Afrique”, Rev. du droit des affaires internationales/Internat.Bus.L.Journal (1999) 228–236Google Scholar. OHADA has at present 16 member states, mostly Francophonic countries in Central Africa as well as two non-Francophonic states, i.e. Equatorial Guinea and Guinea-Bissau.

4 French text and English translation in Anoukaha, , Le droit des sûretés dans l'Acte Uniforme OHADA (Yaounde 1998) 79 et seq., 119 et seq.Google Scholar; Text and commentary by Issa-Sayegh, in Issa-Sayegh, , Pougoué, and Sawadogo, (eds.), OHADA. Traité et Actes uniformes commentés et annotés (Futuroscope Cedex 1999) 615–698.Google Scholar

5 Cf. art. 10 OHADA Treaty, ibid.

6 Art. 30 second sentence fifth dash. In the Romanic legal systems, any contract requires a “cause” to be valid, cf. French Civil Code art. 1131.

7 Art. 30 second sentence last dash.

8 Art. 30 second sentence.

9 Ibid.

10 Arts. 7:857 to 7:863 of the new Civil Code entered into force on 1 January 1992.

11 Law on Guarantee of 19 March 1999 no. 361.

12 Guarantee Law 5722-1967, as amended 1992 and re-amended 1998.

13 Consumer Protection Law of 8 March 1979, frequently amended, ss. 25a-25d.

14 Code de la consommation, Première partie (Législative) (Loi no. 93-949 of 26 July 1993) (frequently amended), especially art. L. 313-7 to 313-10.

15 Consumer Credit Act of 12 June 1991, arts. 34-38 and 97.

16 Act on Financial Contracts of 25 June 1999 no. 46.

17 Austria § 1 (1) no. 1; Belgium art. 1 no. 2 and art. 3 no. 5; Finland § 2 no. 7; France Code consomm. art. L. 313-1 juncto art. L. 311-2 para. 1 and art. L. 312-2; Code monétaire et financier Art. L. 313-22 para. 1; Law 94-126 of 11 Feb. 1994 art. 47, as modified by Law 98-657; Israel s. 19 s.v. Creditor; Norway § 57 para. 1.

18 Austria § 1(1) no. 2.

19 Israel s. 19 s.v. single guarantor.

20 Norway § 57 para. 4.

21 Netherlands art. 7:857.

22 Finland § 2 no. 6. If the connection with the debtor company is terminated, the security giver enjoys protection (§ 11).

23 The two categories are defined in s. 19. The NIS amounts are indexed and today amount to approx. US $ 16,000 and 135,000, respectively (information provided by Prof. Einhorn).

24 Belgium art. 1 no. 1 defines “consumer” as every natural person who “for the transactions governed by this Law acts for a purpose which may be regarded as alien to its commercial, professional or artisanal activities”. French Code consomm. art. L. 313-7 para. 1.

25 French Code consomm. arts. L. 313-7 to 313-10.

26 Israel s. 18. “Indemnity” is the English name for an independent guarantee, i.e. a guarantee whose validity as well as extent and conditions of liability do not depend upon the validity or extent and conditions of an underlying obligation.

27 Cf. especially arts. 34-36; cf. also arts. 33, 38 and 97.

28 CC art. 7:863, referring expressly to the qualified definition of the dependent guarantor in art. 7:857, cf. supra 3.2, text preceding n. 21.

29 Castermans, , “Borgtocht”, in: Nieuwenhuis, , Stolker, and Valk, (eds.), Vermogensrecht (1999) 1045 et seq., 1057Google Scholar; Wessels, , “Borgtocht”, in: van den, Berg, van der, Heijden a.o. (eds.), Compendium Bijzondere Overeenkomsten, 8th ed. (1995) 449 ss., 459.Google Scholar

30 Especially §§ 25c and 25d; cf. also §§ 25a and 25b (2).

31 Norway § 59 para. 1 litt. a) and f), cf. also d).

32 Israel s. 22 (b).

33 Finland § 12 para. 1.

34 Austria § 25a.

35 Israel s. 24 (a).

36 Finland § 12 para. 2; Norway § 59 para. 1 litt. a) and b).

37 Israel s. 22 (a).

38 Belgium arts. 34 para. 1, 97.

39 Israel s. 24 (2); Norway § 59 para. 2.

40 Finland §§ 12 para. 2,34.

41 Austria § 25c; Supreme Court 25 July 2000, Österreichische Juristenzeitung (2001) 59 Evidenzblatt no. 10.Google Scholar

42 Austria § 25d; Finland § 7.

43 Code consomm. art. L. 313-10.

44 Norway § 60 para. 2.

45 Generally Finland §§ 7 para. 1 and 12 para. 3.

46 Austria § 25 d; Israel s. 23 (a) no. (1) and (5). Cf. also for Belgium text supra at n. 38.

47 Belgium art. 34 para. 1, CC art. 1326; France: Code consomm. art. L. 313-7, CC art. 1326; Israel s. 21; Norway § 61 para. 1.

48 France: Code consomm. art. L. 313-7; Norway § 61 para, 2 juncto § 59 para. 1 lit. b).

49 Dutch CC art. 7:858.

50 Israel s. 27.

51 Norway § 61 para. 2.

52 Dutch CC art. 7.861 paras. 1-2. Paras. 3-4 limit the guarantor's liability for two special situations.

53 Belgium and France: CC art. 1326; Norway § 61 para. 1 sent. 2.

54 Code consomm. art. L. 313-7 para. 2.

55 French Code consomm. art. L. 313-8 para. 2 and Law 94-126 art. 47 para. 1.

56 Belgium art. 97; France: the texts cited supra n. 47 and 55; Israel s. 21 (b); Norway § 61 para. 1.

57 CC art. 2016 para. 2, as inserted in 1998; Code monétaire art. L. 313-22 para. 1.

58 Finland § 13 para. 1.

59 Finland § 14.

60 France: cf. supra n. 57; Finland § 13 para. 2, § 14 para. 3.

61 French Code consomm. art. L. 313-9 first sentence; Austria § 25b para. 2; Law 94-126 art. 47 para. 3; Israel s. 26 (a); in Israel, the notice must describe certain special rules for “protected guarantors”, s. 26 (b).

62 Belgium art. 35.

63 Austria § 25b second sentence; French Code consomm. art. L. 313-9 second sentence.

64 Israel s. 26 (a).

65 Belgium art. 36.

66 Finland § 25 para. 1. The creditor must approve the substitute guarantee unless it is one issued by certain public authorities or by banks subject to public supervision.

67 CC art. 2024 second sentence, as inserted by Law of 29 July 1998.

68 Code consomm. art. L. 331-2, as revised by Law of 29 July 1998.

69 Belgium art. 38 para. 3.

70 Austria § 2 para. 2; Belgium art. 4; Israel s. 32; Netherlands art. 7:862 lit. a); Norway § 2 para. 1.

71 Code consomm. art. L. 313-16.

72 Dutch CC art. 7:862 lit. a).

73 Israel s. 32 juncto ss. 5, 7 and 12.

74 Norway § 65 para. 4.

75 Finland § 38; Norway § 2 para. 3.

76 Finland § 37; Norway § 5 para. 2.

77 Norway § 4.