Securitisation

This overview is a guide to the Banking & Finance content within the Securitisation subtopic, with links to appropriate materials.

Securitisation is a term used to cover a range of financing techniques used by a holder of assets to transfer risk from the assets using methods of financial structuring. Typically, a combination of asset or risk transfer, securities issuance, and derivatives is used to achieve this. The Bank of International Settlements identifies three elements of structured finance, which are equally applicable to securitisation:

  1. pooling assets owned by the holder

  2. tranching (ie division into tiered levels) issued bonds, which are backed (ie secured) by the asset pool, and

  3. de-linking (ie removal) the credit risk of the pool of assets from the credit risk of the holder of the assets

There is a large variety of structures that can be used to bring about this result and the method used will be dictated by the type of asset and the type of holder.

The most significant holders of assets will typically be banks—commercial banks use their capital to extend loans to various borrowers and these loans are

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