In an economic context where the judicial liquidation of a company often jeopardises the personal assets of its guarantors, LE BOT law firm is proud to announce a total victory obtained before the Tribunal de commerce de Bobigny.
By a judgment rendered on 4 November 2025, the Court fully discharged our client from all of his joint surety obligations towards the CREDIT INDUSTRIEL ET COMMERCIAL (CIC). This decision resulted in the dismissal of all of CIC’s payment claims amounting to nearly 17,000 €.
Background Facts
The dispute concerned the validity of the surety commitments in light of our client’s financial situation at the time they were entered into, raising the issue of manifest disproportion.
Our client had stood as guarantor for company X with CIC in respect of a current account, three loans, and a first-demand rent guarantee.
Following the judicial liquidation of the company pronounced in June 2023, the bank served our client with formal notice to pay the total sum of 17,000 €. CIC subsequently brought proceedings against our client before the Tribunal de Commerce de Bobigny seeking his condemnation in his capacity as joint surety.
Without our firm’s intervention, the judgment against him would have led to asset seizures and a disastrous impact on our client’s financial situation.
Court Decision: Full Discharge of the Surety
The Tribunal de commerce de Bobigny upheld our client’s defence in its entirety.
Regarding the sureties entered into before the 2021 reform (article L.332-1 du Code de la consommation), the Court held that the commitments were manifestly disproportionate and that CIC failed to prove that the corporate guarantor had the capacity to meet his obligation at the time he was called upon (July 2023). As a result, the Court discharged our client from his commitments signed on 15 November 2019.
Regarding the surety entered into after the reform (article 2300 du Code civil), the Court likewise concluded that the commitment was manifestly disproportionate. In accordance with the applicable legal provisions, the Court could have reduced the commitment, but given the absence of real property assets and the guarantor’s level of income, it held that he should be discharged from the entirety of his commitment.
This represents a 100% outcome in the client’s favour, confirming the effectiveness of our defence.
Tribunal de commerce de Bobigny, 4 November 2025, RG 2023F01969
