
One of the documents used in transactions is the standard form promissory note, which constitutes a written promise by the debtor to the creditor to pay the amount specified therein. As a document, it is of a strict formal nature, due to the provisions of the law that recognize its content as irrefutable proof of the facts stated within it.
According to Article 78 of the Contracts Law, Cap. 149, the debtor signs it in the presence of at least two witnesses competent to contract, promising to pay upon first demand or at a fixed time or determinable future time, to the creditor, a sum of money plus interest, and, in the case of legal proceedings, the related expenses, and it states the consideration for which the promise is given.
Its validity is not affected by the fact that it is secured by guarantee, pledge, or mortgage over immovable property.
Provided the above conditions are met, its content becomes conclusive, and the only defense that may be raised—according to Article 80 of the Law—is that the signature of the debtor or of the person who signed the note is not in fact their signature, or that the issuance of the promissory note was obtained through duress or fraud.
The strength of the standard form promissory note is such that the creditor can obtain a summary judgment against the debtor if they fail to fulfill their promise. The Court, as jurisprudence has established, cannot go behind the declared consideration and examine the consideration stated in the promissory note.
In the Supreme Court decision in C.A. E242/2014 dated 03.09.2020, the judge Mrs. P. Panayi, who issued the unanimous ruling, examined whether the trial court was correct in issuing a summary judgment against the debtor based on a standard form promissory note, stating that evidence aimed at contradicting the truth of the note’s content is not admissible.
Upon issuance of a judgment, as an enforcement measure, the debtor’s immovable property may be encumbered with a memo and, consequently, be auctioned as provided by the relevant legislation.
It is understood that the reference to a memo means that it constitutes a real encumbrance and does not permit the transfer of any property to any person, whether through gift or sale.
This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice.
Panayiotis Kyprianou
Lawyer
Related News
Explore our News & Insights for authoritative commentary on emerging case law, legislative developments, and market trends delivered in clear, actionable analyses.