M.A.B. Invs. v Vibert [1972] JJ 2127 (08 August 1972)

M.A.B. Invs. v Vibert [1972] JJ 2127 (08 August 1972)

Connivance or gross negligence by the creditor in relation to the principal debtor's impropriety, such as failing to call in a debt when clearly in danger, discharges the surety; mere passive acquiescence does not.

Citation
[1972] JJ 2127
Parties
Claimant: M. A. B. Investments; Defendant: Vibert
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
08 August 1972
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Legal Topics
Discharge of Surety, Creditor's Conduct, Gross Negligence, Connivance
Contract Law Guarantee and Indemnity Discharge of Surety Creditor's Conduct Gross Negligence Connivance

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M. A. B. Investments

Claimant

Vibert

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the surety is discharged by the creditor's connivance or gross negligence in relation to the principal debtor's impropriety.

Ratio Decidendi

Connivance or gross negligence by the creditor in relation to the principal debtor's impropriety, such as failing to call in a debt when clearly in danger, discharges the surety; mere passive acquiescence does not.