Precontractual duty to inform the surety

Sureties often claim that they have not been informed about the difficult financial situation of the principal debtor prior to the conclusion of the contract and that they have been the victims of a fraud. Usually, it is the debtor who is responsible for the fraud: he is interested in concealing or...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Dabić Snežana
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, Serbia 2018-01-01
Series:Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu
Subjects:
Online Access:https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0003-2565/2018/0003-25651802220D.pdf
_version_ 1818645468201091072
author Dabić Snežana
author_facet Dabić Snežana
author_sort Dabić Snežana
collection DOAJ
description Sureties often claim that they have not been informed about the difficult financial situation of the principal debtor prior to the conclusion of the contract and that they have been the victims of a fraud. Usually, it is the debtor who is responsible for the fraud: he is interested in concealing or even improving his real financial situation. However, the surety contract is concluded between the surety and the creditor. Is the surety in a position to annul the contract if the deceit is practiced by a third party? On the other side, creditors (especially, banks) often possess the exact information about the financial capacity of the debtor: should they inform the surety about this? And what are the consequences if they do not? Can the surety ask for the annulment of the contract on the basis of creditor's non-disclosure?.
first_indexed 2024-12-17T00:31:13Z
format Article
id doaj.art-2b74a6c52d014a56b839acebd28ed4a6
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 0003-2565
2406-2693
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-17T00:31:13Z
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher University of Belgrade, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, Serbia
record_format Article
series Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu
spelling doaj.art-2b74a6c52d014a56b839acebd28ed4a62022-12-21T22:10:17ZengUniversity of Belgrade, Faculty of Law, Belgrade, SerbiaAnali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu0003-25652406-26932018-01-0166222024310.5937/AlaniPFB1802220D0003-25651802220DPrecontractual duty to inform the suretyDabić Snežana0Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu, SerbiaSureties often claim that they have not been informed about the difficult financial situation of the principal debtor prior to the conclusion of the contract and that they have been the victims of a fraud. Usually, it is the debtor who is responsible for the fraud: he is interested in concealing or even improving his real financial situation. However, the surety contract is concluded between the surety and the creditor. Is the surety in a position to annul the contract if the deceit is practiced by a third party? On the other side, creditors (especially, banks) often possess the exact information about the financial capacity of the debtor: should they inform the surety about this? And what are the consequences if they do not? Can the surety ask for the annulment of the contract on the basis of creditor's non-disclosure?.https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0003-2565/2018/0003-25651802220D.pdfsuretyshipdefects of consentfraudduty to inform
spellingShingle Dabić Snežana
Precontractual duty to inform the surety
Anali Pravnog Fakulteta u Beogradu
suretyship
defects of consent
fraud
duty to inform
title Precontractual duty to inform the surety
title_full Precontractual duty to inform the surety
title_fullStr Precontractual duty to inform the surety
title_full_unstemmed Precontractual duty to inform the surety
title_short Precontractual duty to inform the surety
title_sort precontractual duty to inform the surety
topic suretyship
defects of consent
fraud
duty to inform
url https://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/0003-2565/2018/0003-25651802220D.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT dabicsnezana precontractualdutytoinformthesurety