Islamic finance transaction structures

This overview is a guide to the Banking & Finance content within the Islamic finance transaction structures subtopic, with links to appropriate materials. For more information on each of the transaction structures set out below, see Practice Note: Introductory guide to Islamic finance transaction structures.

Ijarah

Ijarah can be seen as the Islamic financing equivalent of leasing and is often considered a hybrid between conventional operational and finance leases. The financier purchases an asset at the customer's request. This asset is then leased by the financier to the customer in return for rent paid to the financier. Title to the asset itself remains with the financier—it is simply the usufruct (the right to use or enjoy the asset) that is transferred to the customer for the term of the lease.

For further details, see Practice Note: Structure and key features of an Ijarah transaction.

Istisna'a

Istisna'a is a contract for manufacture or development and is commonly used in project finance to fund large-scale industrial projects or major assets which are not yet in existence. The financier will instruct a supplier to procure the manufacture,

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Banking & Finance News

High Court clarifies position of sole directors under Model Articles and the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and in-court appointment of administrators (Re KRF Services (UK) Ltd and others)

Restructuring & Insolvency analysis: This High Court case (which addresses two important issues in UK company law and sanctions regulations) will be of interest to insolvency practitioners, corporate and restructuring lawyers, sanctions lawyers, and businesses and individuals which are affected by sanctions. Firstly, it clarifies the position of sole directors under the Model Articles for private limited companies. The court ruled that a sole director can validly pass board resolutions and bind the company, regardless of whether they have always been the sole director or were previously part of a multi-member board. This interpretation resolves conflicts between Article 7(2) and Article 11(2) of the Model Articles, with the court favouring Article 7(2)'s provisions. Secondly, the case examines the interaction between UK sanctions regulations and the in-court appointment of administrators. The court determined that making an administration application and order does not breach asset-freezing sanctions, even when the company is designated or controlled by a sanctioned person. While an Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) license is typically required for administrators to act, the court retains discretion to make immediate appointments in urgent situations. Written by Joshua Ray and Duncan Henderson, partners at CANDEY, which acted for the First and Second Applicants on this matter.

View Banking & Finance by content type :

Popular documents