The Relationship between the MAC and the Rail (Luxembourg) Protocols to the Cape Town Convention and Domestic Secured Transactions Law

Abstract

While all of the protocols of the Cape Town Convention involve some interaction with domestic general secured transactions law, this is particularly true of the Rail Protocol and the MAC Protocol. This article maps where interactions are likely to arise, and focuses on two particular areas: the scope of the Protocols as regards the assets and transactions covered, and the effect of registration under domestic law and the Convention. The practical impact of the fact that a piece of equipment does, or may, fall within one or other of the protocols is assessed, concluding that there are many advantages to financiers in the additional application of the Cape Town regime, while the potential cost of double registration or double searching (itself a matter of choice for the financier) is likely to be out-weighed by the benefits. While the domestic benefits of ratification for a State ’ s market participants will, to some extent, depend on how far the Convention ’ s advantages of clarity, certainty and a very robust registration regime already exist in the domestic law, the added advantage of the internationality of the CTC system provides an additional reason for ratification.