Supreme Court holds that a bill of exchange debtor's discharge from liability does not automatically release a co-debtor from liability.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court ruled that the discharge of one bill of exchange debtor from liability does not automatically release a co-debtor from their remaining obligation. The creditor argued that since the debt had expired against one party, the other should also be exempt, but the court rejected this view. The court decided that the statutory discharge of one debtor does not extend to the other, preserving the creditor's right to pursue the remaining liable party.
Legislator headnote
AI generateds. 10 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1871; s. 10 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1871: The discharge of one joint debtor from liability does not automatically release the other joint debtor from their statutory obligation.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedCited Case Law
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedFull text
A ja B Oy oli kumpikin eri maksamismääräyksellä velvoitettu maksamaan sama vekselisaatava. Ulosottomies oli A:ta vastaan haetussa ulosotossa katsonut, että A vastasi enää saatavan puolesta määrästä, koska saatava oli sittemmin maksamismääräysten antamisen jälkeen vanhentunut B Oy:n osalta. Kysymys vekselivelallisen velkavastuusta vapautumisen vaikutuksesta toisen vekselivelallisen vastuuseen. Ks. KKO:2006:43