The doctrine of the transfer of a claim is such that the guarantor benefits from the rights and remedies of the creditor against any person responsible for the debt. This applies in particular to the guarantees of a representative who is compelled to answer for his breach of trust against the agent and those who participated in the unlawful act. American Bonding Co. v. National Mechanics` Bank, 97 md. 598, 606 (1903) In Hall v. Windsor Sav. Bank, 97 v. 125, 134 (c. 1923), The Court stated that “whenever the guarantor of an agent is obliged to answer for his breach of trust, he collects the rights of the agent and the cestui”. There are different categories of receivables transfer licenses.

A transfer of a legitimate claim or right of convenience is created under the law if a debt owed by another is repaid, in circumstances that fairly allow the payer to have the creditor`s security or obligation. The conventional transfer of claims is based on an explicit or tacit agreement or understanding when a party not interested or unrelated to the case, who pays the debt of another and is therefore entitled to the rights and titles of the creditor. The right to the transfer of claims is created with the payment of the claim. The entrepreneur is generally entitled to all rights, privileges, priorities, remedies and judgments of the creditor and is subject only to such restrictions and conditions as were binding on the creditor. However, he has no broader rights than the creditor. The transfer of claims is a relatively specialized legal field; Entire legal manuals are devoted to the subject. [3] [4] The transfer of debt does not derive from a stable rule of law. The principle that can be inferred from the doctrine of the transfer of claims is that it is a product of justice or equity.

The shift to demand stems from the natural justice of placing the burden where it should rest. Like other just doctrines, the transfer of debt depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. In addition, it is a means that has been accepted or invented by La Equity to force the definitive execution of a debt or obligation for the person who should pay the debt in good conscience. Home Owners` Loan Corp. v. Parker, 181 Okla. 234, 235 (Okla. 1937).

Second, after payment under liability insurance, an insurer may be allowed to sue the insured if the insured has already paid for his or her loss by the third party. In other words, the insurer is entitled to the insured to ensure that the insured does not benefit from a double recovery. [8] This situation can occur when, for example. B an insured person asserts a full right under the policy, but then initiates proceedings against the third party and claims substantial damages. [9] Strictly speaking, this is not a transfer of debt; it is a refund. Real estate payments: with regard to real estate, a person interested in one property can pay the taxes and taxation that are due by another on the land….