The Autonomy Doctrine in the Law of Letters of Credit and Demand Guarantees in Libya, Egypt and England: A Comparative Study

Letters of credit and demand guarantees play a prominent role in financing international trade. They provide assurance of payment and security for the performance of contractual obligations and have been described as the ‘lifeblood’ of international commerce. Autonomy is the central principle for the instruments of letters of credit and demand guarantees. Under the autonomy principle, the bank’s undertaking to pay for the beneficiary ought to be independent of the diversity of other relationships arising from the underlying contract. In spite of the autonomous nature of these instruments, in certain cases, the national laws will recognise some exceptions or limitations that restrict the application of the doctrine of autonomy. Exceptions such as fraud, nullity, and illegality will allow the national courts to interfere and override the autonomy doctrine by considering other matters, even those concerning the underlying contract. Furthermore, the exceptions of unconscionability or abuse of rights have an effective role in providing deep solutions, especially with regard to the problem of abusive calls for demand guarantees. The autonomy principle is recognised under Libyan commercial law but has yet to form the subject of serious academic literature covering its legal aspects. This study, in part, aims to fill that gap and will examine the extent to which legal aspects govern the principle of autonomy and its exceptions under Libyan law with reference to the new Libyan Commercial Code. A comparison of the laws in England, Libya, and Egypt will be conducted to examine how legal matters concerning autonomy and its restrictions in their laws are addressed. Furthermore, consideration will be given to the experience of Singapore, particularly with regard to the unconscionability and nullity exceptions. The results of this study will consider many different exceptions to autonomy and suggest that fraud is not the only exception to autonomy and that it is not imperative that all exceptions in letters of credit be equally applied to demand guarantees.