Abstract

Objectives: This research aims to clarify the legal status of the financial guarantor in the contract of guarantee in the Jordanian Civil Law and the extent to which the Jordanian legislator's approach is correct and comparable to other legislation in order to reach a legal opinion that may assist the legislator in determining a better and more just approach to producing a more just and harmonious legal text. Methods: The study resorted to using the descriptive and comparative approach by reviewing the legal texts, analyzing them and comparing them with other legislations, such as the Iraqi legislator. Results: The study found that the debt should be collected from the original debtor and his financial liability first, and in the event of his inability to fulfill his full obligation, recourse to the guarantor is a more just logic since the guarantor is often a volunteer in his obligation. The volunteer's obligation is always supposed to be lighter than the compensation obligation, and this comes through amending the text of Article (967) of the Jordanian Civil Code "1- The creditor has the right to claim from the principal or the guarantor or both of them together," so that it becomes "The creditor may not claim from the guarantor alone except after recourse to the debtor". Conclusions: The Jordanian legislator has thus violated his legislative approach that there is no solidarity except by a legal text or agreement, and he was not successful in that, and it was assumed at least that the legal positions of the parties to the guarantee contract would be balanced, especially since the guarantor is often a volunteer in his commitment, wishing to facilitate and make things easier for the two parties to the contract (the creditor).