In the recent case of Shanghai Shipyard Co. Ltd. V.
Reignwood International Investment (Group) Company
Limited [2021] EWCA Civ 1147 the Court of Appeal (COA)
unanimously overturned the first instance decision and found a
parent company guarantee to be a guarantee “on demand”.
Despite arbitration proceedings having commenced under the
underlying contract, the COA found the guarantor liable to pay $170
million under the guarantee. The COA emphasised that the words used
in the guarantee and the commercial context of the guarantee are
critical factors.
“On demand” and “see to it”
guarantees
In construction projects, where a subsidiary company enters into
a contract with a third party, it is common for the third party to
request a parent company guarantee to ensure the performance of the
contract. In that situation a parent company can give a guarantee
to provide a level of security in respect of the obligations of its
subsidiary under the contract. Typically, these