Suspension and preservation clauses in guarantees, properly construed, do not preclude a guarantor from raising affirmative defences (including estoppel, misleading and deceptive conduct, and unconscionable conduct) that, if established, would have the effect that no debt was due and payable by the borrower at the relevant time, so that no liability under the guarantee ever arose. Such clauses are directed at claims of set-off or counterclaim that would reduce or extinguish an existing liability, not at defences that deny the existence of the liability altogether. Further, such clauses cannot protect a creditor against the grant of statutory remedies for misleading and deceptive conduct that may operate retrospectively.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 123 later cases that cite this judgment.
9 of the 123 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.