Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 4380/1997 AI generated

Guarantee period starts from breach date; statute of limitations runs from termination of lease agreement.

Case Number KKO 4380/1997
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court ruled that the limitation period for a guarantee claim began running from the date of the lessee's breach, not the termination of the contract. The lessee failed to pay rent, leading the lessor to terminate the lease and claim damages from the guarantors. The court held that the guarantee obligation was triggered by the breach itself, making the termination merely a consequence that did not reset the limitation clock.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

s. 10 of the Limitation of Actions Act 1973; s. 10 of the Limitation of Actions Act 1973: The limitation period for a guarantee claim commences from the date of the principal debtor's breach of contract, not from the date of the creditor's termination of the agreement.

Keywords

AI generated
guarantee limitation period lease termination statute of limitations breach of contract guarantor liability

Cited Legislation

AI generated
s. 10 of the Limitation of Actions Act 1973
AI generated
kko-precedent_1995_1
Supreme Court held that the three-year limitation period applies to claims for rent paid in violation of index cap laws.
kko-other_2016_2354
Supreme Court dismisses claim for damages from illegal competition restrictions due to statute of limitations expiry.
appeal_1984_eastern-finland__1856
Court allows early termination of fixed-term lease by adjusting rent to avoid unfairness.
kko-precedent_2002_74
Supreme Court allows breach of contract claim where damage emerged 13 years later despite 10-year limitation period starting at contract formation.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2023:31
Supreme Court allows guarantor to avoid liability for rent arrears after fixed term due to unfairness.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Takaajat olivat sitoutuneet yhdistyksen puolesta vuokralleantajalle omavelkaiseen takaukseen arpakonetta koskevan leasingsopimuksen kaikinpuolisesta täyttämisestä. Yhdistyksen laiminlyötyä maksuvelvollisuutensa vuokralleantaja oli irtisanonut sopimuksen ja oli sopimusehtojen mukaan oikeutettu saamaan vahingonkorvausta. Irtisanomisen jälkeen vuokralleantaja vaati vahingonkorvauksen määrää takaajilta. Kysymys siitä, mistä ajankohdasta takauksen vanhentumisaika oli alkanut kulua ja mikä oli vanhentumisaika.