Skip Navigation


Capital Markets Law Journal Advance Access originally published online on March 18, 2008
Capital Markets Law Journal 2008 3(2):126-138; doi:10.1093/cmlj/kmn004
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
3/2/126    most recent
kmn004v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Benjamin, J.
Right arrow Articles by Maher, F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Lessons from Cukurova

Joanna Benjamin and Felicity Maher*
* Dr Joanna Benjamin is Reader in Law at the London School of Economics and Consultant at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. Felicity Maher is a Barrister at 3 Verulam Buildings, Gray's Inn.

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.


Key points

  • The recent decision of the High Court of the British Virgin Islands in Alfa v Cukurova has caused a stir among lawyers serving the international financial markets based in London.
  • The decision concerns the meaning of ‘appropriation’. Appropriation is a new remedy for collateral takers introduced by the Financial Collateral Arrangements (No. 2) Regulations 2003, which implement the Financial Collateral Directive.
  • The decision holds that effective appropriation requires the collateral taker to take over from the collateral giver the ability to deal with the collateral as its own.
  • In Cukurova, where an equitable mortgage was taken over directly held shares, this required that the collateral taker become the registered owner of the shares.
  • The decision was appealed to the BVI Court of Appeal in late January 2008 and may go further. In the meantime, this article provides an overview of the decision and considers its wider significance.

 


   1. Introduction
 
. . . [Full Text of this Article]


   2. Overview of the case
 
The facts
The decision
The ratio
Appeals

   3. Significance of the case
 

   4. Nature of appropriation
 
Nature of security interest
Contrast title transfer collateral arrangements
Meaning of appropriation
The issue in the case

   5. Indirectly held securities
 

   6. The Financial Collateral Directive regime
 

   7. Interpretation of UK provisions implementing EU legislation
 

   8. Doctrine versus pragmatism
 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?