The Practical Lawyer


Guarantees – test extended

A recent HC case considered the common situation where a company director gave personal guarantees in relation to loans provided to a limited company (interestingly, a law firm which had gone into liquidation).

Barclays had provided two loan facilities – one was an overdraft and the other a term loan. Two demands were sent to a director for sums owed. The first was £500 above the specified amount contained in the guarantee. The other demand failed to reach the director due to an address error.

In relation to the first demand the court distinguished a line of authorities which established that a principal debtor obligation creates a primary liability which is not contingent on demand. In the present case, a demand was referred to in both the debtor and surety/guarantee clauses without any identifiable distinction. As such, the HC concluded that in both instances, a demand is required to trigger an obligation to pay.

The HC also had to decide whether the first demand was invalid because the amount demanded was excessive. The judge stated that the guarantee should always be looked at on its own terms and in the proper context. In this case, HC held that the demand was not invalid by reason of demanding an additional £500.

HC did not decide on whether the second demand (not received by the director) could be relied on and would need to be determined at trial

The case extends the established test that a demand made under a guarantee for an excessive amount may nevertheless be effective as a demand for what is due in circumstances where the amount that has been demanded in fact exceeds an express liability cap. Guarantors and their advisers should thus be aware of the extension of this authority.

Source: [2019] 83 Commercial Litigation Journal 18 and Barclays Bank plc v Price [2018] EWHC 2719 (Comm).


Most-read articles

Power of attorney – validity
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
The powers of attorney in a recent case were granted in the context of a share sale, but private client practitioners will benefit from the clarity given by the court on the validity and execution of... Read more...
LeO – VAT and costs information
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
We have reported above that LeO has issued updated costs guidance. Costs complaints often involve disputes above whether VAT was included in the price. The updated guidance states that VAT is often... Read more...
Firm reprimanded – poor language
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
Solicitors are reminded that they are officers of the court at all times and are expected to maintain an appropriate level of courtesy throughout their professional dealings. Read more...
Group action – stays in Liverpool
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
It is interesting to note that the High Court has refused to transfer a multibillion-pound class action from Liverpool to London. The action involves some 200,000 claimants who are suing a mining... Read more...
Fixed recoverable costs – payable if £25k limit exceeded
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
Fixed recoverable costs (FRC) prescribe the amount of damages that can be claimed back from a losing party in civil litigation; they are a way of controlling the legal costs by giving certainty in... Read more...
Section 21 notice – amended form introduced
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
Under Housing Act 1988 an s21 notice gives L an automatic right of possession without having to give any grounds once the fixed term has expired. The notice cannot be used to gain possession during... Read more...
RV – can demand be assumed?
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
To calculate the rateable value (RV) of a property, a valuation officer (VO) must work out what the open market rent would be for the property by applying the rating hypothesis. The purpose is to... Read more...
Proprietary estoppel – successful claim
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
Proprietary estoppel is a remedy which prevents the legal owner of a property from asserting their strict legal right in relation to that property when it would be unconscionable to allow him to do... Read more...
Children – care plans
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
What is the court’s approach where there is an impasse with the LA regarding an important element in a care plan? In this case, the CA found that the trial judge’s invitation to the LA to... Read more...
ET fees – £16m still owing
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
In 2017 the SC ruled that ET fees, introduced by the government in 2013, were unlawful. This was on the basis that they were a barrier to access to the ET, particularly for employees on low incomes. Read more...


IAG International
MSI Global Alliance
In House Lawyer
Join the IBA now!