Clog on the equity of redemption: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:Clogs.jpg|thumb|Clogs on the [[equity of redemption]] (obscured)]] | [[File:Clogs.jpg|thumb|Clogs on the [[equity of redemption]] (obscured)]] | ||
Giving the lie to the old saw that civil law tradition favoured by our continental cousins isn’t clever enough to separate legal and beneficial interests comes this proof that a fundament of the law of equity has its origins in Netherlands. For, otherwise, | Giving the lie to the old saw that civil law tradition favoured by our continental cousins isn’t clever enough to separate legal and beneficial interests comes this proof that a fundament of the law of equity has its origins in Netherlands. For, otherwise, they would be ''sneakers'' on the [[equity of redemption]], wouldn't they. | ||
{{anat|security}} | {{anat|security}} | ||
{{egg}} | {{egg}} | ||
Revision as of 15:38, 6 November 2018
Giving the lie to the old saw that civil law tradition favoured by our continental cousins isn’t clever enough to separate legal and beneficial interests comes this proof that a fundament of the law of equity has its origins in Netherlands. For, otherwise, they would be sneakers on the equity of redemption, wouldn't they.
|
A word about credit risk mitigation
{{{2}}}
|