Template:Amending security interests: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=== | ===Amending security interests=== | ||
[[Security]] is deep Eagle lore. Even sensible, experienced, senior, inhouse lawyers will get the shivers whenever the topic of taking security comes up. From childhood they have been raised on gruesome stories of what happens to legal eaglets who are careless with security interests | [[Security]] is deep Eagle lore. Even sensible, experienced, senior, inhouse lawyers will get the shivers whenever the topic of taking security comes up. From childhood they have been raised on [[Cruwwelpeter|gruesome stories of what happens to legal eaglets who are careless with security interests]]. | ||
If you amend a document granting a [[security interest]] you risk someone trying to argue that you have terminated the old [[security interest]] and created a new one, thereby re-starting any [[voidable preference]] period, invalidating any previously registered charge, and of course relegating your interest behind those of anyone who has registered a [[security interest]] over the same assets in the mean time — the first security interest in time prevails. | |||
Some of these risks have been de-complicated by the [[financial collateral regulations]] (insofar as they’ve done away with registration requirements, [[slavenburg]]s and so on for [[financial collateral arrangement]]s), and while this is still a bit of a mine-field, basic common sense should avoid anyone but the most headless [[chicken-licken]] standing on any landmines. | |||
For one thing, to run any risk you have to actually be amending the [[security interest]] itself, rather than ''other'' legal or economic terms that just happen to be in the same contract. | |||
So, if you have — ooh, say a [[prime brokerage agreement]] which contains a [[charge]] but a lot of other stuff besides — you are (in the humble opinion of [[Jolly Contrarian|this bear of little brain]]) most likely to be amending ''other'' things and not the actual charge provision, which tends to be dull and {{sex|workpersonlike}}. You may tweak [[rehypothecation]] limits, financing rates, [[transaction]] terms and so on — but the [[security package]] will remain intact. | |||
In any case, the following [[magic words]] should help: “These amendments will not affect the effectiveness, time of original execution or priority of any [[security interest]]s.” | |||
In any case, the following magic words should help: “These amendments will not affect the effectiveness, time of original execution or priority of any security | |||
Latest revision as of 11:42, 1 February 2023
Amending security interests
Security is deep Eagle lore. Even sensible, experienced, senior, inhouse lawyers will get the shivers whenever the topic of taking security comes up. From childhood they have been raised on gruesome stories of what happens to legal eaglets who are careless with security interests.
If you amend a document granting a security interest you risk someone trying to argue that you have terminated the old security interest and created a new one, thereby re-starting any voidable preference period, invalidating any previously registered charge, and of course relegating your interest behind those of anyone who has registered a security interest over the same assets in the mean time — the first security interest in time prevails.
Some of these risks have been de-complicated by the financial collateral regulations (insofar as they’ve done away with registration requirements, slavenburgs and so on for financial collateral arrangements), and while this is still a bit of a mine-field, basic common sense should avoid anyone but the most headless chicken-licken standing on any landmines.
For one thing, to run any risk you have to actually be amending the security interest itself, rather than other legal or economic terms that just happen to be in the same contract.
So, if you have — ooh, say a prime brokerage agreement which contains a charge but a lot of other stuff besides — you are (in the humble opinion of this bear of little brain) most likely to be amending other things and not the actual charge provision, which tends to be dull and workpersonlike. You may tweak rehypothecation limits, financing rates, transaction terms and so on — but the security package will remain intact.
In any case, the following magic words should help: “These amendments will not affect the effectiveness, time of original execution or priority of any security interests.”