Our articles are written by experts in their field and include individual barristers, solicitors, academics, judges, and leading firms in relevant areas of practice. JIBFL offers authoritative insights into global banking and financial law, providing essential updates for legal practitioners and policymakers. Covering key topics like lending, security interests, derivatives, debt capital markets, banking and finance related disputes, crypto, FinTech and financial regulation, JIBFL serves as a trusted resource for navigating complex legal challenges and staying informed in the financial sector. If you would like to contribute, please email Amanda.Cohen2@lexisnexis.com.
Fixed and floating charges: still favouring absolutism over multi-factored nuance
© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.
The academics did not fare well in Re Avanti Communications Ltd (in admin) [2023] EWHC 940 (Ch). Edwin Johnson J determined that the security in issue was fixed not floating but not without finding himself in respectful disagreement with Beale Bridge Goode (if only by book title) Gullifer and Worthington. It is perhaps predictable that one of us might rush to a defence. I hesitated appreciating that judges are not similarly free. But the issue is important and the approach advocated in Avanti appears with the greatest respect and even greater admiration for the unravelling of security documents needed in that case to be unsupported by the cases and unworkable in practice. In short even if the answer is right (space prevents that being addressed here) the means of reaching it is surely not. What follows...
If you are already a User, sign in
Or you can register free of charge to read a limited amount of subscriber content per month.
Once you have registered, you will receive an email directing you back to read this article in full.
Alternatively you can subscribe here to read unlimited content.
