英国法上一个令人不安的多重追索案件

Magda E Raczynska
{"title":"英国法上一个令人不安的多重追索案件","authors":"Magda E Raczynska","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2608930","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper looks at issues arising in relation to multiple claims contingent on tracing and following. Where a person grants a security interest in an asset in favour of a lender and subsequently sells the asset to a third party without the secured creditor’s consent, a question arises whether the secured creditor may be able to claim both the sale proceeds and the original asset. This paper explores how English law deals with this problem. Unlike in a number of jurisdictions which implemented Personal Property Security Acts, no statute in English law provides an answer to this question. In addition, the judicial guidance is sparse. An existing view seems to be that the secured creditor cannot claim both the traceable proceeds and the original asset because the remedies are inconsistent although the basis for this inconsistency has not been explored. This paper fills the gap.","PeriodicalId":129207,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal","volume":"210 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Uneasy Case of Multiple Tracing Claims in English Law\",\"authors\":\"Magda E Raczynska\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2608930\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper looks at issues arising in relation to multiple claims contingent on tracing and following. Where a person grants a security interest in an asset in favour of a lender and subsequently sells the asset to a third party without the secured creditor’s consent, a question arises whether the secured creditor may be able to claim both the sale proceeds and the original asset. This paper explores how English law deals with this problem. Unlike in a number of jurisdictions which implemented Personal Property Security Acts, no statute in English law provides an answer to this question. In addition, the judicial guidance is sparse. An existing view seems to be that the secured creditor cannot claim both the traceable proceeds and the original asset because the remedies are inconsistent although the basis for this inconsistency has not been explored. This paper fills the gap.\",\"PeriodicalId\":129207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal\",\"volume\":\"210 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2608930\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Private Law - Contracts eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2608930","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文着眼于与追踪和跟踪有关的多重索赔所产生的问题。如某人将某项资产的担保权益授予贷款人,并在未经有担保债权人同意的情况下将该资产出售给第三方,则会产生一个问题,即有担保债权人是否可以同时索取出售收益和原始资产。本文探讨了英国法律如何处理这一问题。与许多实施人身财产安全法的司法管辖区不同,英国法律中没有成文法对这个问题提供答案。此外,司法指导也比较稀疏。现有的一种观点似乎是,有担保债权人不能同时要求可追溯的收益和原始资产,因为补救办法不一致,尽管尚未探讨这种不一致的依据。本文填补了这一空白。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An Uneasy Case of Multiple Tracing Claims in English Law
This paper looks at issues arising in relation to multiple claims contingent on tracing and following. Where a person grants a security interest in an asset in favour of a lender and subsequently sells the asset to a third party without the secured creditor’s consent, a question arises whether the secured creditor may be able to claim both the sale proceeds and the original asset. This paper explores how English law deals with this problem. Unlike in a number of jurisdictions which implemented Personal Property Security Acts, no statute in English law provides an answer to this question. In addition, the judicial guidance is sparse. An existing view seems to be that the secured creditor cannot claim both the traceable proceeds and the original asset because the remedies are inconsistent although the basis for this inconsistency has not been explored. This paper fills the gap.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
La garantía legal del Estatuto del Consumidor como mecanismo para proteger al comprador frente a vicios inmobiliarios progresivos (The Legal Guarantee of the Consumers Statute as a Mechanism to Protect Buyer Front of Progressive Real Estate Vices) Solidarismo y contratos relacionales: alternativas frente a la pandemia de covid-19 (Contractual Solidarism and Relational Contract Theory: Alternative Approaches to Contract Law in Light of the COVID-19 Pandemic) Error Correction Mechanisms for Transactional Script Smart Contracts The Shadows of Litigation Finance Malas leyes (Bad Law)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1