A Comparative Analysis of the Right of Recourse between Co-Guarantors

Rongxin Zeng

Journal of Politics and Law, 2024, vol. 17, issue 4, 30

Abstract: This paper examines a crucial aspect of the legal framework governing the rights of recourse between co-guarantors. It focus on the Chinese context while drawing insightful comparisons with France, Germany, and the United States. A comprehensive analysis of the pertinent provisions of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China and the Supreme People's Court interpretations reveals inconsistencies and ambiguities that necessitate further examination. To enhance the discourse, the paper contrasts Chinese regulations with those of France, Germany, and the United States, elucidating disparate approaches and potential best practices. This comparative analysis not only identifies the strengths and weaknesses of China's current stance but also suggests avenues for improvement. By examining foreign legal systems, the study identifies areas where Chinese law could be refined to better align with international standards and principles of fairness. The findings emphasize the necessity for the establishment of a more coherent and equitable legal framework in China, one that provides clear and unambiguous guidelines for co-guarantors seeking recourse. It is recommended that steps be taken to address the discrepancies identified and to advocate for reforms that promote legal clarity and enhance the protection of co-guarantors' rights. The paper concludes with a recommendation for comprehensive legislative reform, emphasizing the importance of balancing the interests of all parties involved in co-guarantee arrangements in order to foster a more robust and internationally compatible legal environment.

Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jpl/article/download/0/0/50833/55093 (application/pdf)
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jpl/article/view/0/50833 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ibn:jpl123:v:17:y:2024:i:4:p:30

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Politics and Law from Canadian Center of Science and Education Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Canadian Center of Science and Education ().