Footnotes:
1 These are interests based on title transfer or reservation of title, see paras 1.21–1.26.
2 These could be goods, services, intangible property or other benefits such as insurance or credit protection.
5 This is the definition used in BIS, Financing a private sector recovery (Cm 7923, July 2010).
9 The BEIS SME survey (see footnote 6), found that 31 per cent of MSMEs used overdraft financing and 17 per cent had a bank loan. While the use of overdraft did not vary greatly according to the size of business (31 per cent of micro-businesses, 33 per cent of small businesses, and 36 per cent of medium-sized businesses had overdrafts), the use of bank loans did (16 per cent of micro-businesses, 22 per cent of small businesses, and 31 per cent of medium-sized businesses used bank loan finance). Among sole traders, 23 per cent had overdrafts and 10 per cent had bank loans.
10 Discussed in ch 7. The BEIS surveys found that 1 per cent of sole traders, 4 per cent micro-businesses, 9 per cent of small businesses, and 13 per cent of medium-sized enterprises used receivables financing.
11 The BEIS survey found that 2 per cent of MSMEs had a peer-to-peer loan, but, of those who sought external finance in 2016, 5 per cent had sought a peer-to-peer loan (around 75 per cent of applications for external finance were successful).
12 Also known as ‘asset finance’.
16 This is the definition used in BIS, Financing a private sector recovery (Cm 7923, July 2010).
18 Debt financing of a company financed by private equity is considered at paras 2.17–2.19.
19 See para 2.16 and G Fuller, Corporate Borrowing: Law and Practice (5th edn, 2016), 3.2, 3.5.
20 These are companies who have a credit rating of BBB or Baa or above.
21 For a discussion of the reasons for this, see P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 2–041.
23 G Fuller, The Law and Practice of International Capital Markets (3rd edn, 2012), 9.25–9.26; P Wood, International Loans, Bonds, Guarantees, Legal Opinions (2nd edn, 2007), 12–012.
25 For example, those providing asset based finance or equipment financing.
27 The provision of collateral for derivatives contracts is now also mandated by regulation, see EMIR (European Market Infrastructure Regulation, Regulation 648/2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties, and trade repositories).
29 There is considerable literature on relationship lending, see AN Berger and GF Udell, ‘Small business credit availability and relationship lending: The importance of bank organisational structure’ (2002) 112 The Economic Journal F32; Paola Bongini, Maria Luisa Di Battista, and Laura Nieri, ‘Relationship Lending Through the Cycle: What Can We Learn from Three Decades of Research?’ (15 December 2015). Available at SSRN: <https://ssrn.com/abstract=2925893> or <http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2925893>.
30 In the absence of any contrary intention in the document an overdraft is also repayable on demand, Williams & Glyn’s Bank Ltd v Barnes [1981] Com LR 205; Lloyds Bank plc v Lampert [1999] 1 All ER 161, 167–8; Bank of Ireland v AMCD (Property Holdings) Ltd [2001] 2 All ER 894, [15]–[17].
31 Banks have ‘rescue units’ to provide specialized support to failing companies, see J Franks and O Sussmann, ‘The Cycle of Corporate Distress, Rescue and Dissolution: A Study of Small and Medium Size UK Companies’, IFA Working Paper 306 (2000). Also for many years banks in the United Kingdom operated ‘the London approach’, which involves an agreement between the lending banks not to enforce loans while investigations are made into the problem and a restructuring agreed, see J Armour and S Deakin, ‘Norms in Private Insolvency: The “London Approach” to the Resolution of Financial Distress’ [2001] Journal of Corporate Law Studies 21, 34 et seq. This approach has become less used, given the fragmentation of debt structures and the use of administration, especially involving pre-packs, see para 20.49.
32 The question of when, and indeed whether, a fixed charge can be taken over certain assets such as receivables, the benefit of contracts and stock in trade, is complicated and uncertain, see paras 6.99–6.141.
33 Commentators have often taken the view that the fixed charge is for priority and the floating charge for control, see R Mokal, ‘The Floating Charge—An Elegy’, in S Worthington (ed), Commercial Law and Commercial Practice (2003), 479. The weak priority position of the floating charge on insolvency is discussed at paras 20.21–20.45.
34 The floating charge must be a qualifying floating charge. See para 20.51.
35 [2001] UKPC 28, [2001] AC 710.
38 This is primarily to enable it to appoint an administrator if the company becomes insolvent (see H Beale, L Gullifer, and S Paterson, ‘A case for interfering with freedom of contract? An empirically-informed study of bans on assignment’ [2016] JBL 203), but is also for other reasons. One is to catch any receivables which are not within the sale agreement. Another is to include any receivables that contain an anti-assignment clause: although whether charges over receivables are also prohibited by the anti-assignment clause depends on the construction of the clause, see H Beale, L Gullifer, and S Paterson, ‘A case for interfering with freedom of contract? An empirically-informed study of bans on assignment’ [2016] JBL 203, 214–15, and N Ruddy (ed), Salinger on Factoring (5th edn, 2015), 13.12. Note that secondary legislation to override anti-assignment clauses is shortly to be enacted, see paras 7.82 and 23.180. A charge may also (particularly in the case of factoring) be security for any fees and other charges which may accrue from the borrower to the financier. This is not uncontroversial, see P Walton, ‘Fixed and Floating Charges: the Great British Fund Off?’ (2015) 1 Corporate Recovery and Insolvency 18; A Walters, ‘Statutory Erosion of Secured Creditors’ Rights: Some Insights from the United Kingdom’ [2015] University of Illinois LR 543, 558.
40 For discussion of the requisite control, see para 6.109 et seq.
41 Such a clause will no longer be enforceable when regulations overriding anti-assignment clauses are passed, see para 7.82.
42 H Beale, L Gullifer, and S Paterson, ‘A case for interfering with freedom of contract? An empirically-informed study of bans on assignment’ [2016] JBL 203, 221–2.
43 See L Gullifer and J Payne, Corporate Finance Law: Principles and Policy (2nd edn, 2015), 8.1, 8.4.
44 P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 2–041.
48 P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 4–021.
50 Note that very often in the case of a bond issue, there may well be a bond trustee anyway, who holds the covenant to pay made for it on behalf of the bondholders: see G Fuller, Corporate Borrowing: Law and Practice (5th edn, 2016), ch 12; L Gullifer and J Payne, Corporate Finance Law: Principles and Policy (2nd edn, 2015), 8.3.2.3; P Ali, ‘Security Trustees’ in P Ali (ed), Secured Finance Transactions: Key Assets and Emerging Market (2007); R Tennekoon, The Law and Regulation of International Finance (1991) 226; P Wood, International Loans, Bonds, Guarantees, Legal Opinions (2nd edn, 2007), 16–013.
51 Sometimes in a syndicated loan a duplicate security interest is granted to each lender separately: this is in case a relevant jurisdiction does not recognize the trust, see P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 4–024.
52 For further discussion of the advantages of a security trustee see P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 4–022.
53 In certain circumstances, they will be permitted to enforce if the trustee refuses to do so.
54 See L Gullifer and J Payne, Corporate Finance Law: Principles and Policy (2nd edn, 2015), 381; P Ali, ‘Security Trustees’ in P Ali (ed), Secured Finance Transactions: Key Assets and Emerging Market (2007), 34.
55 P Ali, ‘Security Trustees’ in P Ali (ed), Secured Finance Transactions: Key Assets and Emerging Market (2007), 34.
56 L Gullifer and J Payne, Corporate Finance Law: Principles and Policy (2nd edn, 2015), ch 16.
57 Private equity funds are financed by a relatively small number of investors (e.g. institutional investors, high net-worth individuals, sovereign wealth funds) who inject significant levels of capital into the fund: often £5–10 million for mid to large cap funds (Financial Services Authority, Private Equity: A Discussion of Risk and Regulatory Engagement, Discussion Paper 06/6, 23 (2006). They are commonly structured as English limited partnerships and are professionally managed by skilled investment professionals. The typical duration of a private equity fund is ten years, and investors will usually have their money locked in for that period. See L Gullifer and J Payne, Corporate Finance Law: Principles and Policy (2nd edn, 2015), 16.3.1.
58 For detailed discussion see, C Morgan, ‘Debt finance’, in C Hale (ed), Private Equity: a transactional analysis (3rd edn, 2015); L Gullifer and J Payne, Corporate Finance Law: Principles and Policy (2nd edn, 2015), 16.4.3.
59 The transaction is often much more complicated owing to tax considerations.
60 This is often called quasi-equity.
62 P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 26–013.
63 See generally R Jack, A Malek and D Quest, Documentary Credits (4th edn, 2010); R King, Gutteridge & Megrah’s Law of Bankers’ Commercial Credits (8th edn, 2001) and E McKendrick (ed), Goode on Commercial Law (5th edn, 2016), ch 35.
66 Financial assistance is defined as including that given ‘by way of guarantee, security or indemnity’ (Companies Act 2006, s 677(1)(b)). See Chaston v SWP Group plc [2002] EWCA Civ 1999; [2003] 1 BCLC 675 and, further, P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 26–011; A Hudson, The Law and Regulation of Finance (2nd edn, 2013), 42–40 et seq.
67 For detailed discussion see J Forrester, ‘Ships’, in P Ali (ed), Secured Finance Transactions: Key Assets and Emerging Market (2007).
68 For discussion of registration and priorities in relation to ship mortgages see para 14.34 et seq.
70 In practice the engine and the airframe are usually separately financed.
75 For an example of an aircraft operating lease, see Celestial Aviation Trading 71 Ltd v Paramount Airways Private Ltd [2010] EWHC 185 (Comm).
76 P Wood, Project Finance, Securitisations, Subordinated Debt (2nd edn, 2007), 4–050.
77 For a more comprehensive list of possible assets, see N Cuthbert, ‘Security for Projects, part 2’ (1998) 16 IBFL 128; P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 26–031.
78 P Wood, Comparative Law of Security Interests and Title Finance (2nd edn, 2007), 2–045.
79 See ch 22. This is very often not the case, and the security package for projects will vary enormously depending on the governing law.
81 For a clear explanation, see R McCormick, ‘Steppin’ Out With The Rescue Culture Club’ (2006) 3 JIBFL 99.
82 Now s 72A Insolvency Act 1986.
83 Insolvency Act 1986, s 72E. The meaning of ‘step-in rights’ was considered but not conclusively determined by the Court of Appeal in Cabvision Ltd v Feetum [2005] EWCA Civ 1601, [2006] Ch 585. The Court held that the mere right to appoint an administrative receiver did not constitute step-in rights, as this would part of the statutory provision superfluous. See further R McCormick, ‘Steppin’ Out With The Rescue Culture Club’ (2006) 3 JIBFL 99.
84 See para 7.133 et seq, and G Fuller, Corporate Borrowing: Law and Practice (5th edn, 2016), ch 7; G Fuller, The Law and Practice of International Capital Markets (3rd edn, 2012), ch 4; A Hudson, The Law and Regulation of Finance (2nd edn, 2013), ch 47; J Benjamin, Financial Law (2007), 18.10 et seq; P Wood, Project Finance, Securitisations, Subordinated Debt (2nd edn, 2007), part 2; J De Vries Robbe, Securitisation Law and Practice in the Face of the Credit Crunch (2008).
85 The EU is proposing new regulatory rules to facilitate simple securitizations, as part of the move towards a Capital Markets Union, as it is seen as powerful tool for increasing the availability of credit and the reducing the cost of financing (see Action Plan on Building a Capital Markets Union (COM(2015) 468)). An agreement between the EU Commission, the EU Council, and the EU Parliament was reached on 30 May 2017, and the new rules are currently being finalized (see <http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1480_en.htm>).
86 Thus, for example, mortgage receivables, credit card receivables, receivables due under corporate loans or hire purchase or leasing arrangements.
87 P Wood, Project Finance, Securitisations, Subordinated Debt (2nd edn, 2007), 7–010. There are usually two waterfall clauses: a pre-default one and a post-default one. For details, see J De Vries Robbe, Securitisation Law and Practice in the Face of the Credit Crunch (2008) 49 et seq.
90 J De Vries Robbe, Securitisation Law and Practice in the Face of the Credit Crunch (2008) 39.
91 This is the Official List of the UK Listing Authority.
93 Insolvency Act 1986, s 72B, which applies to such arrangements where the debt is at least £50m.
94 G Fuller, The Law and Practice of International Capital Markets (3rd edn, 2012), 8.24–25; P Wood, International Loans, Bonds, Guarantees, Legal Opinions (2nd edn, 2007), 4.58.
95 D Petkovic, ‘New structures: “whole business” securitisations of project cash flows’ [2000] JIBFL 187; M Brailsford, ‘Securitisation-Creating Securities’ (2004) 725 Tax Journal 15. Examples of businesses financed by a whole business securitizations are London City Airport (1999), several pub companies such as Punch Taverns (2007), British Airports Authority (2007), Thames Water (2006) and Electricity North West (2009).
96 Insolvency Act 1986, s 72B or 72E (or 72C or 72D which apply to public–private partnerships or utilities).
97 These are known as credit events, which are events of default, or similar events such as restructuring to avoid an event of default, in relation to the reference obligations.
98 G Fuller, Corporate Borrowing: Law and Practice (5th edn, 2016), 4.75; P Wood, International Loans, Bonds, Guarantees, Legal Opinions (2nd edn, 2007), 28–23; S Henderson, ‘Synthetic Securitisation, Part 1: The Elements’ (2001) 9 JIBFL 402.
100 This ‘flip’ clause is the subject of the important decision on the anti-deprivation principle, Belmont Park Investments Pty Ltd v BNY Corporate Trustee Services Ltd [2011] UKSC 38, which is discussed at paras 8.100–8.101.
101 See the Regulated Covered Bonds Regulations 2008. New EU rules on covered bonds are proposed for the first quarter of 2018, see the Mid-Term review of the Capital Markets Union Action Plan (COM(2017) 292).
102 Much useful discussion of the uses of financial collateral is contained in J Benjamin, Financial Law (2007), chs 13, 20.1. See also L Gullifer (ed), Goode and Gullifer on Legal Problems of Credit and Security (6th edn, 2017), ch 6.
103 The definition in the Financial Collateral Directive 2002 and the Financial Collateral Arrangements (No 2) Regulations 2003 (as amended) is very specific and is discussed at paras 3.18–3.34.
105 This will only be the case if the relevant criteria are met, see ch 3.
106 [2010] EWHC 1772 (Ch).
107 J Benjamin, Financial Law (2007), 20.08.
110 J Benjamin, Financial Law (2007), 20.09.
112 See EMIR (European Market Infrastructure Regulation, Regulation 648/2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties, and trade repositories) and L Gullifer, ‘Compulsory Central Clearing of OTC Derivatives: The Changing Face of the Provision of Collateral’ in L Gullifer and S Vogenauer (eds), English and European Perspectives in Contract and Commercial Law (2014).
113 For a technical definition of these in relation to the Financial Collateral Directive 2002 and the Financial Collateral Arrangements (No 2) Regulations 2003, see paras 3.15–3.16.
115 For an explanation of how central banks use repos to add or subtract liquidity from the system, see S Valdez and P Molyneux, An Introduction to Global Financial Markets (8th edn, 2016), 188–9.
116 Note that those holding securities as collateral under title transfer collateral arrangements or security arrangements including the right of use will use them extensively to raise short-term cash, see para 6.45 and, for an example, see Re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (In Administration) [2010] EWHC 2914 (Ch).
117 M Choudhry, The REPO Handbook (2nd edn, 2010), 7.
118 Re Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (In Administration) [2010] EWHC 2914 (Ch).
119 In a repo the counterparty’s money obligation will be the original seller’s obligation to buy back (see para 7.65), and in a securities lending transaction it will be the lender’s obligation to return the cash transferred as collateral for the return of the securities, see para 7.73.
121 For a fuller explanation, see S Firth, Derivatives Law and Practice (looseleaf) ch 6; L Gullifer (ed), Goode and Gullifer on Legal Problems of Credit and Security (6th edn, 2017), para 6-02.
123 EMIR, the European Market Infrastructure Regulation, Regulation 648/2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties, and trade repositories, together with the Regulatory Technical Standards made thereunder (especially the Commission Delegated Regulation EU/2016/2251). In relation to centrally cleared transactions, see Art 4 and Art 41 of EMIR. For non-centrally cleared transactions, see Art 11 EMIR.
124 This amount can be calculated in a number of ways, one of which is the amount that it would cost to buy a replacement transaction in the market.
126 S Firth, Derivatives Law and Practice (looseleaf) 6.011.
127 S Firth, Derivatives Law and Practice (looseleaf) 6.012. This will be specified in para 11 of the English Credit Support Annex to the ISDA Master Agreement.
128 This would, of course, be a default.
129 English law Credit Support Annex 1995 para 5 or English law Credit Support Annex for Variation Margin 2016 para 5. The latter revision is designed to work with the regulatory regime imposed by EMIR.
130 If a ‘haircut’ applies, the valuation will be at the reduced percentage unless the 2009 ISDA close-out amount protocol applies.
131 English law Credit Support Annex 1995 para 2 or English law Credit Support Annex for Variation Margin 2016 para 2 and s 6(e) ISDA Master Agreement.
132 1995 English law Credit Support Deed or ISDA 2016 Phase One IM Credit Support Deed (the latter is designed to work with the EMIR requirements).
133 See paras 3.27–3.28, and L Gullifer (ed), Goode and Gullifer on Legal Problems of Credit and Security (6th edn, 2017), ch 6.
134 See M Yates, ‘Custody, prime brokerage and right of use: a problematic coalition?’ (2010) 7 JIBFL 397.
135 In particular, for the extra obligations imposed in relation to prime brokerage agreements in CASS Rules 9.2 and 9.3.
138 See L Gullifer (ed), Goode and Gullifer on Legal Problems of Credit and Security (6th edn, 2017) para 6-09.