The Case Analysis Of Beidahuang Guarantee Company Against Sanjiangyuan And Other Five Companies For Contract Disputes

With the continuous development and improvement of China's socialist market economy,the loan exchanges between civil subjects become more and more frequent.More and more civil subjects begin to use the way of guarantee in the loan transactions to improve the security of creditor's rights.Mixed joint guarantee has many different types of guarantee in the same legal relationship of creditor's rights and debts,and the guarantee methods are diverse and complex,which also leads to frequent disputes.Although there are many laws on mixed joint guarantee system in our country,there are still contradictions between the new law and the old law on the legislative concept of the guarantee of guarantor and the guarantee of property,and the controversy that is easy to occur in practice is not covered by the law;among them,when the debtor provides the guarantee,the new law still has contradictions with the old law on the realization order of the guarantee of guarantor and the guarantee of property.When the guaranty of property is invalid,the guarantor's liability is not clearly stipulated by law,so it is difficult to deal with the more complex specific cases in practice.The case analysis of Beidahuang guarantee company against Sanjiangyuan and other five companies in this paper is a typical case of debtor's guaranteed invalidity under mixed joint guarantees.The main disputes include the determination of the cause of the case,the validity of pledge when the pledge is not actually delivered,and the invalidity of guarantor's guarantor's guaranty of debtor's guaranty.The problem of guaranteeing liability is discussed.In the case of mixed joint guarantee,under the coexistence of guarantor's guarantee and debtor's property preservation,the joint fault of creditor and debtor causes the debtor's pledge not to be established(property insurance invalidation);The creditor is deemed to have renounced the property insurance because its fault damages the guarantor's reliance on the reliance,so the guarantor is exempted from the joint guarantee responsibility within the scope of the pledge priority compensation.From point to point,the legal theory behind the typical case is gradually analyzed.By comparing other cases,the main basis and opinions of the current court judgment are refined and corresponding suggestions are put forward,in order to provide reference and help in the field of legislation and judicial practice in our country.