ILR Review ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 117
Author(s):  
Ira Michael Shepard ◽  
Thomas R. Haggard

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sven Kalisz

The reinstatement of third-party collateral has not received much academic attention to date. Previous treatment of this issue has, in relation to many questions, merely led to seemingly apodictic assertions, without taking each systematic, historical context into account. This work provides coherent, dogmatically well-founded reasoning with respect to this set of issues. It scrutinizes prior approaches to this, in particular the differentiation between accessory and non-accessory collateral, resolves issues that have been disputed to date and provides a viable, dogmatic solution. In conclusion, possible contractual solutions are outlined which, contrary to previous approaches, except for tax and accounting law issues, protect the collateral taker as far as possible against good faith acquisition by third parties and can stand up to the strict case law relating to “restrictive security agreements”. This work is aimed at both practitioners and academics.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-60
Author(s):  
Federico Caviggioli ◽  
Giuseppe Scellato ◽  
Elisa Ughetto

Abstract In this paper, we investigate the phenomenon of patent collateralization by empirically focusing on the factors that affect the outcome of the collateralization process. In particular, we want to examine to what extent patent quality, lenders’ characteristics, as well as lenders’ selection capabilities (i.e. in identifying high-quality patents) affect the likelihood of observing a security interest release. We identify the patents recorded in security agreements and their release from the USPTO Patent Assignment database. The final dataset is made up of a total of 8818 security interest agreement records, involving 133,110 patents pledged as collateral for debt between 2007 and 2010. We find evidence that a security interest is more likely to be released for patents with a higher technical merit and when the lenders are more experienced and are specialty finance companies. When considering other types of lenders (i.e. banks in particular) or less experienced lenders, the positive association between the security interest release and the technical merit of the pledged patent is lower. The evidence suggests that IP-backed loans represent an effective financial channel for those firms that control valuable intangible assets and that experience and specialization allow lenders to develop better selection capabilities.


Author(s):  
Raczynska Magda

This chapter considers the ways in which a secured creditor or a holder of a title-based interest may bargain for interest in derived assets (proceeds, products or fruits) where the agreement contains a derived asset clause. Parties may bargain for interest in proceeds, products or fruits by way of a clause in the agreements or by virtue of the relationship between proprietary interests and derived assets. The effect of dispositions of assets subject to security interests depends on whether the charge is fixed and floating. The chapter first examines sale of goods contracts with retention-of-title (RoT) clauses that extend the retention of title to proceeds and products, along with security agreements bearing derived asset clauses. It also explains the effect of derived asset clauses as after-acquired property clauses, focusing on pledges and legal mortgages, equitable security interests, and security interest in after-acquired property granted in a document by an individual.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document