Article 226 of the Saudi Civil Transactions Law
المادة 226 من نظام المعاملات المدنية · الفرع الثالث: تضامن المدينين
The Article prevents a jointly liable debtor from relying on a set-off arising between the creditor and another jointly liable debtor except to the extent of that other debtor's share.
Official text (Arabic)
This article has not been amended since the law was issued.
لا يجوز للمدين المتضامن أن يحتج بالمقاصة التي تقع بين الدائن ومدين متضامن آخر إلا بقدر حصة هذا المدين الآخر.
This is the official Arabic wording, the only legally binding version. We do not translate the law itself; the explanation below is ours. Official source: Bureau of Experts at the Council of Ministers
Article 226 explained in plain English
This Article deals with a case where a set-off occurs between the creditor and one of the jointly liable debtors, meaning the debtor has a right against the creditor that is set off against the debt.
The rule: A jointly liable debtor may not rely on a set-off that occurred between the creditor and another jointly liable debtor except to the extent of that other debtor's share.
This means:
- If a set-off occurs between the creditor and one of the jointly liable debtors, its effect on the remaining debtors is limited to that debtor's share of the debt.
- If the creditor claims from another jointly liable debtor, that debtor may ask for a deduction of only the share of the debtor with whom the set-off occurred, and no more.
The reasoning is that set-off is a defense belonging to the debtor who holds the counter-right against the creditor, so others do not benefit from it in full. This is consistent with Article 225, under which each jointly liable debtor may raise only defenses personal to him or common to the debtors.
This rule resembles what Article 227 provides where one jointly liable debtor's share is extinguished by merger of liabilities, as the debt is extinguished for the other debtors only to the extent of that debtor's share.
Determining the shares and whether the set-off has actually occurred depends on the facts, and it is advisable to consult a lawyer specializing in civil cases.
Practical example
Mohammed and Salem are jointly liable debtors to a merchant in Madinah for SAR 40,000, with each having a share of SAR 20,000. Salem had a claim against the merchant that was set off. If the merchant claims from Mohammed, Mohammed may rely on this set-off only to the extent of Salem's share, which is SAR 20,000.
Translated from our Arabic explanation with machine assistance. For guidance only; it does not replace advice from a lawyer on your situation.
How we write and review contentA question about Article 226 of Civil Transactions Law?
Describe what happened and specialist lawyers answer. You can write in English.
- Completely free
- Lawyers from the directory answer
- Your name stays hidden
Civil Litigation & Compensation lawyers: ask a specialist about your case
Describe your situation briefly and we'll suggest a lawyer who specialises in this law
Civil Litigation & Compensation lawyers
Lawyers who handle this kind of case
Dr. Ali Al-Rubaie Law Office and Ittihad Al-Asr Legal Company
Active contributor
Unwan Law Firm
Frequently asked questions about Article 226 of the Saudi Civil Transactions Law
Do I benefit from a set-off that occurred between the creditor and my co-debtor?
Yes, but only to the extent of your co-debtor's share. It may not be relied on beyond that.
Does a set-off with one debtor end the whole debt?
No. The other debtors may rely on it only to the extent of the share of the debtor with whom the set-off occurred.
What is the reason for this limit?
Set-off relates to the right personal to that debtor, and a jointly liable debtor may raise only what is personal to him or common to the debtors under Article 225.
More articles on Condition, Term and Joint Liability
- Article 127
If several persons are liable for a harmful act, they are jointly liable for compensation, the court sets each one's share, and if that is not possible, liability is divided equally.
إذا تعدد المسؤولون عن فعل ضار كانوا متضامنين في التزامهم بتعويض الضرر، وتعين المحكمة نصيب كل منهم في التعويض وفق القواعد الواردة في هذا الفصل، وإذا تعذر ذلك كان
- Article 197
The article defines a conditional obligation as one whose existence or disappearance depends on a future event that may or may not occur.
يكون الالتزام معلَّقًا على شرطٍ إذا كان وجوده أو زواله مترتِّبًا على أمرٍ مستقبلٍ محتمل الوقوع.
- Article 198
The article provides that an obligation made conditional on an event that has occurred is treated as immediate, and one made conditional on something impossible has a void condition and is itself void.
إذا علق الالتزام على أمر واقع عد الالتزام ناجزًا، وإذا علق على أمر مستحيل عد الشرط باطلًا، ويبطل الالتزام الذي علق عليه.
- Article 199
The article provides that an obligation does not arise if it is made conditional on a condition whose purpose is to encourage something unlawful.
لا ينشأ الالتزام إذا عُلق على شرطٍ يكون القصد من التعليق عليه الحض على أمر غير مشروع.
- Article 200
The article provides that an obligation does not exist if it is made conditional on a suspensive condition making its existence depend on the mere will of the obligor.
لا يكون الالتزام قائمًا إذا علق على شرط واقف يجعل وجود الالتزام متوقفًا على محض إرادة الملتزم.
- Article 201
The article provides that an obligation subject to a suspensive condition is not enforceable unless the condition is fulfilled and cannot be performed before then, while the creditor may take steps to preserve his right.
لا يكون الالتزام المعلق على شرط واقف نافذًا إلا إذا تحقق الشرط المعلق عليه، ولا يكون الالتزام قبل تحقق الشرط قابلًا للتنفيذ، وللدائن أن يتخذ من الإجراءات ما يُح
The texts are reproduced from the official website of the Bureau of Experts at the Council of Ministers for reference; where they differ, the officially published Arabic text prevails. This content is not legal advice.