<<
>>

Promissio indemnitatis and fideiussio fideiussoris

We have so far largely been dealing with the standard form of fideiussio. Suretyship, however, gave the Roman lawyers ample opportunity to display their ingenuity in devising special types of transactions to meet special circumstances or to get around some of the more cumbersome edges of fideiussio.

Promissio indemnitatis has been mentioned already.15 r This way of drafting the suretyship stipulation seems to have become fairly popular in classical law, because it had advantages for both the creditor and the surety: for the creditor it provided a convenient way of avoiding the consequences of litis consumptio; for the surety it was favourable in that it made his liability a subsidiary one. The fideiussor fideiussoris (achterborg, Nachburge, rear-surety) is another example.152 He undertook a suretyship for a surety, thus guaranteeing not the obligation of the principal debtor but that of the first surety. By using this form of rear-suretyship, the creditor had the benefit of the additional security afforded by a plurality of sureties, while on the other hand evading the inconvenience of having to sue all of them individually for their proportionate share (in case they chose to avail themselves of the beneficium divisionis).

Cf. Levy, Sponsio, pp. 164 sqq.; Frezza, Garanzie, vol. I, pp. 186 sqq.; but see Provera. Studi Sanfilippo, vol. IV, pp. 636 sqq.

Cf. e.g. Windschcid/Kipp, § 481, 3.

15,1 As far as the right of recourse between joint debtors is concerned, cf. Wesener, (1965) 11 Labeo 35U sqq.; Kaser, RPr II, pp. 456 sq. For an evaluation of the historical development of the right of recourse in Roman law generally, see Wesener, pp. 360 sq.

H Cf. supra, note 86.

132 Cf. e.g. Ulp. D. 46, 1, 8, 12 and Caney/Forsyth, op. cit.. note 49, p. 48.

2.

<< | >>
Source: Zimmermann R.. The Law of Obligations. Roman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition. Juta & Co, Ltd,1992. — 1241 p.. 1992

More on the topic Promissio indemnitatis and fideiussio fideiussoris:

  1. Fidepromissio and the transition to fideiussio
  2. II SPONSIO, FIDEPROMISSIO AND FIDEIUSSIO
  3. Limited accessoriness of fideiussio
  4. THE IMPACT OF FIDEIUSSIO ON MODERN LEGAL SYSTEMS
  5. 2. From "Konsumptionskonkurrenz" to "Solutionskonkurrenz"
  6. Sponsio and fidepromissio
  7. 1. The classical principle of "Konsumptionskonkurrenz”
  8. The use of manda turn, especially the mandatum qualificatum
  9. SURETYSHIP
  10. Classical and post-classical compromissum
  11. The use of emptio venditio for the purpose of suretyship
  12. Scope and Structure of this Book
  13. Roman-Dutch law
  14. Beneficium excussionis vel ordinis
  15. Introduction
  16. Partnership (societas)
  17. Anderson Matthew (ed.). Toward a Critique of Guilt: Perspectives from Law and the Humanities. JAI Press,2005. — 168 p., 2005
  18. A Variety of Penalties
  19. CHAPTER THREE A NEW APPROACH TO UNDERSTAND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL AND ROMAN LAW IN THE ARCHIVES