身元保証の裁判例(1) : 過去20年間の裁判例の考察

概要

論文の詳細を見る
In this paper I took up and examined judicialdecisions on fidelity guarantee (Mimoto-Hosho)in the last twenty years.Fidelity guarantee is a security system in accordance with the longstanding customs of ourcountry. In many cases, a contract is made atthe start of employment. However, dependingon the situation, the fidelity guarantee contracthas to be updated every five years during theemployment period.Regardless of the presence or absence of legalresponsibility, in Japan, the term “Mimoto-Hosho” is also used in various situations other than employment. In particular, a fidelity guaranteefor an employee pursues a guarantor’s legal responsibility. Also in this guarantee, althoughthe legal responsibility of a guarantor is not always recognized, those who are requestedto become a guarantor (Mimoto-Hoshonin) are forced under a heavy psychological burden.In principle, a guarantor assumes responsibilityfor compensating the damage which an employee does to an employer. Between a guarantor and an employer, the amount of the guarantor’s obligation to pay reparations is not usually defined in advance. A guarantor may be burdened with a very heavy responsibility in some cases.The Fidelity Guarantee Act was enacted in 1933, and courts have limited the range of guarantorresponsibility by judicial discretion based on the Act. I examined how the courts would have solved the cases in this paper. In part (1), I considered judicial decisions about the legal character of fidelity guarantee and the formation of a fidelity guarantee contract.

著者

能登真規子
滋賀大学経済学部

身元保証の裁判例(1) : 過去20年間の裁判例の考察

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク