The share of jointly owned property is taken into account when assessing the disproportionate nature of the commitment of a guarantor married under a separation of property regime.
Cass. civ. 1, January 19, 2022, No. 20-20.467
In a ruling dated January 19, 2022, the Court of Cassation confirmed its reversal on the disproportionate commitment of a guarantor married under the regime of separation of property.
In this case, a person married under a separation of property regime became jointly liable for several obligations granted by a bank to a company. Following the commencement of insolvency proceedings, the guarantor was called upon to pay.
In order to avoid this, the latter invokes the disproportion of the guarantee act in relation to her assets and income on the basis of article L332-1 of the Consumer Code .
The Court of Cassation declares that the disproportionate nature of the commitment of a guarantor married under the regime of separation must be assessed in view of the entire assets of said guarantor, both his own property and income and his share of the undivided property belonging to the community.
And this is true even though jointly owned property cannot be liquidated without the consent of the spouse in accordance with the matrimonial property regime chosen by the spouses and Article 1415 of the Civil Code .
A person married under a separation of property regime is advised to exercise even greater caution when signing a guarantee agreement, as it will now be more difficult for them to invoke the disproportionate nature of the guarantee if they own a share in jointly owned property.

Fanny Hurreau
author
associate lawyer
Repetition of old-age benefits obtained by fraud
Court of Cassation, Plenary Assembly, May 17...
Biennial prescription: the Court of Cassation finally sets limits in favor of insurers
The obligation to inform insurers about the causes of interruption of the two-year prescription does not require mentioning the entire article 2243 of the Civil Code according to which the interruption does not take place when the claimant give up, leave...
Interview with Romain Picard, young partner of the firm Arst Avocats specialized in Corporate / M&A
Today we welcome Romain Picard, a young partner from Arst Avocats, who tells us about the reasons that led him to join the firm and talks to us about the projects that drive him with regard to the development of the practice of Corporate / M&A in this office...
Repetition of old-age benefits obtained by fraud
Court of Cassation, Plenary Assembly, May 17...
Biennial prescription: the Court of Cassation finally sets limits in favor of insurers
The obligation to inform insurers about the causes of interruption of the two-year prescription does not require mentioning the entire article 2243 of the Civil Code according to which the interruption does not take place when the claimant give up, leave...
Interview with Romain Picard, young partner of the firm Arst Avocats specialized in Corporate / M&A
Today we welcome Romain Picard, a young partner from Arst Avocats, who tells us about the reasons that led him to join the firm and talks to us about the projects that drive him with regard to the development of the practice of Corporate / M&A in this office...