首页> 外文OA文献 >A legal comparison of a notarial bond in South African law and selected aspects of a pledge without possession in Belgian law
【2h】

A legal comparison of a notarial bond in South African law and selected aspects of a pledge without possession in Belgian law

机译:南非法律公证债券与比利时法律中没有占有的质押的选定方面的法律比较

摘要

A real security right improves a creditor’s chances of recovering a debt owed to him by the debtor. In the case of an ordinary pledge, the pledgor delivers physical control of his movable property to his creditor to serve as security for the repayment of the principal debt. The increasing value and use of movable property as an object of security coupled with technological advancement have resulted in many countries calling for legal reform of real security rights over movable property. In South Africa this led to the introduction of the Security by Means of Movable Property Act 57 of 1993 which makes provision for a pledge without possession. The Act regulates only special notarial bonds and does not apply to general notarial bonds. The real security right vests in the bondholder upon registration of the bond, provided that the movable property encumbered is described in a notarial bond in a way that makes it readily recognisable. The Act has substituted delivery with registration in the Deeds Registry. Registration of the notarial bond in the Deeds Registry is questioned as to whether it complies with the publicity principle. This is because movable property can be shifted from one place to another without any knowledge on the part of the creditor due to the inaccessible and costly registration system. The third party then receives the property subject to the real security right of the creditor. The substitution of delivery with registration is the controversial feature in this study. Linked to the legal problems regarding compliance with the publicity principle, is the description and identification requirement as provided for under the Act, the exclusion of general notarial bonds from the application of the Act, and the question of whether it is appropriate to regard special notarial bonds as pledges without possession. This study questions whether the current land registry system should be used for the registration of notarial bonds and suggests that a new system designed specifically for the registration of real security rights over movables be considered. I compare the position in the Belgian legal system as regards developments in real security rights over movables to identify possible solutions and recommendations for the South African approach.
机译:真正的担保权可以提高债权人追回债务人欠他的债务的机会。在普通质押的情况下,质押人将其动产的实物控制交给债权人,以作为偿还本金的担保。动产作为担保对象的价值和使用的增加以及技术的进步,导致许多国家呼吁对动产的实际担保权进行法律改革。在南非,这导致引入了1993年第57号《动产财产法》,其中规定了不拥有财产的保证。该法仅对特殊公证债券进行监管,不适用于一般公证债券。真正的担保权在债券登记后归属于债券持有人,条件是在公证中以易于辨认的方式在公证债券中描述担保的动产。该法案以在契约注册处的注册代替了交付。质疑公证书在契据登记处的注册是否符合宣传原则。这是因为由于难以获得和昂贵的注册制度,动产可以在一个地方转移到另一个地方而债权人却不知道。然后,第三方将收到受债权人实际担保权约束的财产。用注册代替交付是本研究中有争议的特征。与有关遵守宣传原则的法律问题相关的是该法规定的描述和识别要求,该法的适用不包括一般公证人的债券以及是否适合考虑特殊公证的问题债券作为没有财产的保证。这项研究质疑是否应使用当前的土地注册系统进行公证的注册,并建议考虑专门设计用于动产实物担保权注册的新系统。我比较比利时法律体系中有关动产的实际担保权的发展情况,以确定针对南非方法的可能解决方案和建议。

著录项

  • 作者

    Ntsoane Lefa Sebolaisi;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2017
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号