Facts
On 6 December 1990, F. issued a bill of exchange by which he undertook to pay to the order of Bank X. in Herisau the sum of 15'000'000.-- on 6 May 1991. [A.] signed this bill of exchange as a guarantor. After a handwritten modification of the order clause to « G. AG » and the transfer of the blank endorsed bill of exchange by [G. AG] to Bank X., the latter protested the prolonged bill of exchange on 15 May 1991.
In order to avoid a recourse action by Bank X. against [G. AG], B. and D. intervened as intervener payers within the meaning of art. 1058 CO and transferred the entire claimed amount to Bank X.
The single judge of the district court of Meilen granted a provisional exequatur for 15 million on 29 October 1991 in the enforcement proceedings against the guarantee. Subsequently, [A.] brought an action for denial of right, which the district court of Meilen dismissed by judgment of 15 September 1994. The cantonal court (1st civil chamber) of the canton of Zurich rendered a similar judgment on appeal on 30 November 1995.
A nullity complaint filed by the plaintiff against the judgment of the cantonal court was dismissed by the complaints court of the canton of Zurich by decision of 2 June 1997, insofar as it was admitted. The public law appeal filed against this decision was dismissed by the Federal Court in a judgment rendered today, insofar as it was admitted.
The plaintiff also filed an appeal for revision against the judgment of the cantonal court, which the Federal Court rejects.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the validity of Bank X.'s receipt for the amount paid by the intervener payers. The plaintiff argued that the receipt had to be affixed to the bill of exchange itself, in accordance with art. 1061 para. 1 CO. However, the Federal Court considered that the receipt could be affixed to an allonge, as this did not compromise the security of commerce.
The Federal Court also examined the question of whether the payment date by…