Інститут поруки: дискусійні аспекти функціонування

Abstract

У статті звернуто увагу на те, що провідне місце серед традиційних способів забезпечення виконання зобов’язання займає порука. Цей спосіб можна трактувати по різному, а саме: як грошову відповідальність; як будь-яку відповідальність у вигляді здійснення за боржника його дій; як договір або як і договір, і відповідальність. Порука є одним із найефективніших та най забезпечувальних способів, тому що виконання зобов'язання забезпечується не просто грошима чи якимось майном, а за допомогою залучення додаткової особи - поручителя. The article draws attention to the fact that the leading place among the traditional ways of ensuring the fulfillment of an obligation is occupied by a surety. This method can be interpreted in different ways, namely: as monetary responsibility; as any responsibility in the form of carrying out his actions for the debtor; as a contract or as both a contract and a liability. Suretyship is one of the most effective and most secure ways, because the fulfillment of the obligation is ensured not just by money or some property, but by the involvement of an additional person - the guarantor. It is worth noting that only a valid claim can be secured by a guarantee. Since it has an accessory (additional) character, invalidation of the main obligation, for the purpose of which the contract of suretyship was concluded, entails the indisputable invalidity of sureties as well. The contract of suretyship begins to perform its function when the debtor violates the main contract, that is, from the moment of its non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment. In contrast to a penalty or deposit, the surety is not aimed at stimulating or encouraging the debtor to properly fulfill his duty, its security function is manifested in another way. With the help of a surety, the creditor receives additional guarantees of the fulfillment of the obligation, i.e. the guarantor is responsible to the creditor for the breach of the obligation by the debtor. A guarantee by its legal nature is an accessory obligation, that is, derived from the main one. Such a determining feature of suretyship is defined doctrinally, despite the absence of the concept of accessory in civil legislation. The additional nature of suretyship is that the invalidity of the main obligation causes the invalidity of the deed regarding its security, and the invalidity of the surety, in turn, does not cause the invalidity of the main obligation.