Authorised Guarantee Agreement (Aga)

Non classé

With regard to the first provision, the High Court found that both the original tenant and the guarantor (now a co-operational group) had committed to comply with the AGM`s commitments. The commitments therefore directly guaranteed the obligations of the assignee and were null and void and unenforceable vis-à-vis the surety. However, if a guarantor attempts […]

Sep 12
Vous avez déjà voté !

With regard to the first provision, the High Court found that both the original tenant and the guarantor (now a co-operational group) had committed to comply with the AGM`s commitments. The commitments therefore directly guaranteed the obligations of the assignee and were null and void and unenforceable vis-à-vis the surety. However, if a guarantor attempts to secure the performance of the obligations by the assignee, this would be a « direct guarantee ». Such a direct guarantee would be contrary to the anti-infringement provisions of the 1995 Act and would be invalid and unenforceable. However, the outgoing tenant`s surety cannot guarantee that the tenant`s obligations fulfilled by the assignee will be fulfilled, as this would be a direct guarantee and would be invalidated by the anti-avoidance provisions provided for by law. A second provision has predetermined. »

Posted in Non classé