Desktop version

Home arrow Law

General Considerations

(a) One could say that it has been customary, these last years, due to influences by the mentality of foreign laws, mainly those of the common law tradition.

(b) Generally, yes. Still, the Cape Town Convention is considered by Greek jurists as very much complicated and difficult to be adopted by Greece, given the system that is already in existence.[1]

A very important issue is that of the Public Service and the way the Cape Town Convention deals with it. Things in Greece’s economy and the structure of it, change fast, too fast most probably. The three Protocols took different approaches, or, to be more accurate: they took non-identical approaches, in relation to this issue. The least interested in dealing “directly with the on-going possibility of a public interest in protecting certain assets from creditor repossession” is the Aircraft Protocol. It might be because, as it is pointed out, “governments are persuaded that the political gain of facilitating cost-effective private sector finance for aircraft operators, and therefore a highly competitive aviation industry and cheap flights for the public, outweighs the political downside of withdrawal of service”,[2] but it is not always so simple and, obviously, not all governments have the same attitude.

In Greece, by law 3710/2008, the National Council of Railways was constituted, which became the competent institution for the purchase of the railway services. By law 3891/2010, all necessary legislatives were taken for the restructuring of the rail sector, while, in parallel, the Regulative Authority of Railways was constituted, being mainly competent for the purchase of railway services.

The article 29 of the law 4111/2013 provides that the “Hellenic Company of Preservation of Rail Rolling Stock” will be competent, as the agent of the Hellenic State, for the management and the leasing to third parties of the rail rolling stock that either belongs to the Hellenic State or belongs to EUROFIMA and is leased by the Hellenic State.

The Luxembourg Protocol follows a “successful” Cape Town Protocol, as far as the success is counted on the number of ratifications. The problems persist though, and, for example, a much discussed issue of the Luxembourg Protocol is that of the prospective liability of the Registrar.[3]

As already mentioned, in Greece many things change and one of them is that many parts of the public sector are being privatized or, at least, using private financing.[4]

This fact has stirred a lot of heated debates and one could express the opinion that the picture of the legal and economic system is not yet clear.

The Space Assets Protocol, for now, does not really concern Greek jurists. HellasSat, the only satellite that Greece had, has been purchased by foreign capitals, a few years ago.

It should once more be stated that the Cape Town Convention and Protocols, as legal texts are brilliantly structured, though very much complicated in practice and very difficult to be implemented in the various and very different between each other legal systems, especially since the whole texts’ mentality is more or less evidently common law oriented.

  • [1] However, there are also voices in favour of the adoption and ratification of the Cape TownConvention. For example, Voulgaris, I. (2010), La location-financiere (leasing) en Grece, RevueHellenique de Droit International 223, 239, believes that is not possible that Greece adheres to theUNIDROIT Ottawa Convention 1988, which includes ships and other naval constructions, but, onthe contrary, considers the idea of adoption and ratification by Greece of the Cape Town Conventionand Protocols as rather positive.
  • [2] Rosen, H. (2013), Public Service and the Cape Town Convention, Cape Town ConventionJournal 133 (131-147).
  • [3] Bollweg, H.-G./Schnell, K. (2007), Liability of the Registrar for the Registration of InternationalInterests Pursuant to the Luxembourg Railway Protocol, Uniform Law Review 12(3) 571-572(559-572).
  • [4] The same thing ascertain Bollweg, H.-G./Kreuzer, K. (2008), Das LuxemburgerEisenbahnprotokoll. Zum Protokoll zum Ubereinkommen uber international Sicerungsrechte an
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >

Related topics