Perfecting and registering security

This overview is a guide to the Banking and Finance content within the Perfecting & registering security subtopic, with links to the appropriate materials.

Perfecting security

A brief description of the reasons for perfecting security follows. For information on how to perfect security and further information on why it is necessary, see Practice Notes:

  1. Perfecting security

  2. How to perfect security in loan transactions

  3. Perfecting security—summary of required steps

Validity and enforceability against third parties

Once security is validly created, it is binding as between the security provider and the secured party. However, the security is not necessarily automatically binding on third parties such as a liquidator or administrator of the security provider, or third party secured creditors.

In many cases, further steps must be taken to 'perfect' the security. Perfection is the means by which security is made enforceable against certain third parties.

Perfection can be achieved in a number of ways and the correct way of perfecting a particular security interest depends on:

  1. the type of entity granting the security

  1. the type of security being taken, and

  2. the

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