Abstract
Guaranty contract is a unilateral contract, so guarantor just redeem the guaranty obligation and assume the guaranty liability, but not enjoy any benefits from creditor. Obviously, it’s unfavorable to the guarantor. However, the guarantor is still willing to provide security of guaranty for the debtor. It’s clear that there is a certain legal relationship between them.Owing to that relationship, the guarantor provides the guaranty for the debtor.
The reason that the guarantor is willing to provide guaranty for the debtor is either out of the debtor’s commission, or is out of guarantor’s voluntary service ,or is out of the guarantor’s meaning of gift. So, how to solve the problem that to abandon debtor’s limitation right of pleadings, whether guarantor can exercise the right of recovery.We should distinguish and analyze the legal relationship between guarantor and debtor.The paper adopts comparatively analytical method. Firstly, the paper points out what legislation example on the basis of guarantor’s right of recovery adopted by China’ legislative branch. Then the analysis points out what the legislation example we have adopted is the reason why the issue is difficult to be resolved fairly and reasonable. For this reason and in the comparative summary of the scholars’ experience in resolving the issue in China. Further analysis points out that we should learn from Japanese lawmaking example which resolves the issue in the light of the legal relationship between guarantor and debtor. Then the paper continues to expound and prove this kind of regular legislation theory and practice of significance that our country should adopt in the future. At this foundation on，the paper try to solve the issue that to abandon debtor’s limitation right of pleadings, whether guarantor can exercise the right of recovery with analysis on the notice obligation are redeemed by the debtor and guarantor.
Key words: The Reason for Guaranty; Guarantor’s Right of Recovery; Notification Obligations
