82,891
edits
Pledge: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{anat|security|}}{{d|Pledge|/plɛʤ/|n|}} | ||
It is the act of pledging, not the document evidencing the pledge, which | A {{tag|legal security}} interest — a type of [[bailment]], if we’re getting technical — created by transferring [[possession]] of an asset [[by way of security]] for a an obligation, with the intention to create that [[security interest]]. It is the ''act'' of pledging, not the document ''evidencing'' the pledge, that matters. | ||
The [[pledgee]] takes a “special” proprietary legal interest in the assets, though, but does ''not'' take legal title to them. The key factor is [[possession]]. This makes a pledge kind of awkward where the debtor wants to carry on holding or using the asset — in that case, a [[floating charge]] or an [[assignment by way of security]] is better — but you do see it (as for example in the {{1995csd}} — though that document is far less popular than the non-pledge {{1994csa}}, which is a straight out [[title transfer collateral arrangement]].) | |||
Preferred means of delivering collateral vary in different markets. If you had to generalise, you would say our American friends, west across the big ditch, prefer [[pledge]] mechanics; British and commonwealth types tend to favour [[title transfer]]. | |||
{{Csa title transfer vs pledge|vmcsa}} | {{Csa title transfer vs pledge|vmcsa}} | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Possession]] | |||
*[[Luxembourg pledge]] | *[[Luxembourg pledge]] | ||
*[[Pledgee]] | *[[Pledgee]] | ||
| Line 14: | Line 16: | ||
*[[Account control agreement]] | *[[Account control agreement]] | ||
*[[Tri-party collateral arrangement]] | *[[Tri-party collateral arrangement]] | ||