Desktop version

Home arrow Law

The Greek Law on Security Interests Burdening Transport Vehicles as Compared with the Cape Town Convention

Elina N. Moustaira

The initial idea, when the text of the Cape Town Convention was being prepared, was to create a uniform security interest, following the model of the “security interest” of the article 9 of the USA’s Uniform Commercial Code, assimilating practically the conditional sale agreements and the leasing agreements with the security agreements.[1] This “functional” approach was partly abandoned afterwards, because it was thought that it might find hindrance in the non-common law States.[2]

Nevertheless, the “basic framework” of the Cape Town Convention is “that which applies to secured transactions in the UCC and other legal systems which have been influenced by the UCC”.[3]

Finally, Cape Town Convention applies to all three mentioned agreements which create the so-called by the Cape Town Convention “interest”. What is more, it is foreseen that the according to the rules of conflict of law applicable law will have the competence to determine if and in what category among the covered by this common name, will an international interest be included.[4]

Its rules are valid as a uniform law and they apply, not only to the international cases, but also to absolutely national [internal] transactions, except if a Member

State declares that, as far as it is concerned, the Cape Town Convention will not be applied to the internal transactions.[5]

Greece has ratified the Geneva 1948 Convention on the International Recognition of Rights in Aircraft (Law Decree 543/1970), but has neither signed nor, obviously, ratified the Cape Town Convention.

  • [1] Stanford, M. (1996), Completion of a First Draft of Unidroit’s Planned Future Convention onInternational Interests in Mobile Equipment, Uniform Law Review, 1(2), 275, 277 (274-283);Cumming, R.C.C. (1990), International Regulation of Aspects of Security interests in mobileequipment, Uniform Law Review, 62-206.
  • [2] Moustaira, E.N. (2001), Convention on International Interests on Mobile Assets as it is applied inaircraft equipment [in Greek], Koinodikion 367-390.
  • [3] Deschamps, M. (2013), The perfection and priority rules of the Cape Town Convention and theAircraft Protocol. A comparative law analysis, Cape Town Convention Journal, 53 (51-64).
  • [4] Foex, B. (1999), La reserve de propriete dans l’avant-projet de Convention d’UNIDROIT : unpoint de vue suisse, Uniform Law Review, 4(2), 416 (409-424). E.N. Moustaira (*) School of Law, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greecee-mail: This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it © Springer International Publishing AG 2017 243 S. Kozuka (ed.), Implementing the Cape Town Convention and the DomesticLaws on Secured Transactions, Ius Comparatum - Global Studies inComparative Law 22, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-46470-1_15
  • [5] Bollweg, H.-G./Kreuzer, K. (2000), Entwurfe einer UNIDROIT/ICAO - Konvention uberInternationale Sicherungsrechte an beweglicher Ausrustung und eines Protokolls uberLuftfahrtausrustung, ZIP, 1361, 1364.
 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >

Related topics