Doubt

You’ve done it again!

You write “1 If a bill which must be presented for acceptance is not so presented the endorser the drawer and their gurantors are not liable on the bill.
Sir what this means ??
Does this mean that they will not have to pay to the payee or the holder ???” and you quote Article 53

“1 If a bill which must be presented for acceptance is not so presented the endorser the drawer and their gurantors are not liable on the bill.”

Apart from your misspelling of guarantors, the Article actually refers to “the drawer, the endorsers and their guarantors …” and not as you have identified.

These slight differences ARE important.

Where a bill must be presented for acceptance and the payee fails to so present it to the drawee for acceptance, despite being specifically told that it must be presented, then there is no liability on that bill as a result of that failure to present.

So far as pre-presentation signatories are concerned, there is no liability. Think of this purely from the drawer’s perspective. The drawer writes out a bill of exchange, requiring it to be accepted, directing that the drawee shall pay to the payee a sum certain in money to …

The payee SHOULD present the bill to the drawee for acceptance of liability, but the payee fails to do so. Why should the drawer remain liable on the bill merely because the payee was dilatory? So far as the drawer is concerned, the liability is discharged from the moment the bill is written and sent to the payee.

Where the drawee has a guarantor, then failure to accept (by the drawee) would activate the guarantor’s liability.

OK?

You’re very welcome