Bank highlights the difference between surety and demand guarantees

SORAINEN represented one of the leading commercial banks in the region in a civil dispute concerning the allegedly incorrect fulfilment of the bank's obligations arising from a demand guarantee. The opponent's claim was that due to the bank's actions they had suffered damages and they asked for a refund of the payments transferred to the bank as their part of the obligation. The bank successfully argued against the claim, putting emphasis on the distinction between a surety and a demand guarantee.

The client was advised by partner and head of the Dispute Resolution Team in Latvia Agris Repšs and senior associate Edgars Briedis.

Back