Comparison between the Juridical Regime of the Debt Instruments: Bill of Exchange, Promissory Note and Cheque

The bill of exchange, the promissory note and the cheque are debt instruments regulated by the bill of exchange law. The debt instruments are differentiated from other instruments used in civil and commercial relations by the inclusion of the debt in the instrument, hence the name of debt instrument. The main features of the debt instruments are: formal, literal and autonomous nature. The debt instruments are formal in the sense that the creation, the existence, the circulation and the exercise and the use of the patrimonial rights included depend on the existence of the elements included in the instrument. Moreover, the high rigorous nature of the debt instruments is reflected by the obligation to meet some requirements regarding the form (the bill of exchange, the promissory note and the cheque imply some compulsory requirements in order to be valid). The debt instruments are literal, in the sense that the existence and the coverage of the patrimonial rights are established through the wording included in the instrument; thus, the juridical relation that caused the issuing of the debt instrument no longer influences the right deriving from the instrument (whether a sales-purchase agreement, or a loan or a debt opening); no possibility for the debt instrument to be interpreted or completed with other documents. The autonomous nature of the debt instruments can be seen, on the one hand, in relation to the fundamental juridical relation that caused it, and in this case, we shall consider that the individual who issued the instrument has an obligation which is not under the existing fundamental relation but exclusively under the instrument which the individual signed; on the other hand, each new signatory has an autonomous juridical position and acquires a new, original right, not a transferred right. The autonomy of the debt instruments explains the principle according to which the holder of the instrument exercises one’s own right and exceptions cannot be opposed to him, namely the protection measures that could be opposed to the previous holders (principle of non-opposability of exceptions)