|PhD ceremony:||Mr F.J.L. Kaptein|
|When:||June 23, 2016|
|Supervisor:||prof. mr. dr. F.M.J. (Frank) Verstijlen|
|Where:||Academy building RUG|
If someone lends money to another person, he trusts that he will get his money back. Particularly in the context of commercial relationships, there is a need for more security. Such security can be achieved by a so-called security right on someone’s property. If the debtor does not pay back the borrowed money, the secured creditor can use his security right to sell the property. From the proceeds, he may recover his claim. The most common example of such a security right is the mortgage on a house.
Another security right is the right of pledge. Movable goods and claims can be pledged. In former days, a good could only be pledged if the good was actually handed over to the creditor. If the debtor did pay his loan, he got his property back. One could think of the pawnshop. Since 1992, the Dutch Civil Code offers the possibility to pledge a good, while the debtor stays in possession. This means that the debtor can then continue to use the good, for example if the pledged good is a machine that is necessary for the business operations of the debtor. This PhD thesis analyzes the consequences such invisible security right leads to.
Imagine the situation that a third person buys the pledged good from the debtor. Or that a third party gives a loan to the debtor because he thinks that there are enough means of recovery against the debtor’s property. Should there be stricter requirements for invisible security rights? Is the insolvency administrator obliged to give the pledged machine, which is necessary for the business operations, back to the creditor? These and other questions are answered in the PhD thesis. Additionally, solutions are developed to address the arising problems.