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.
Floating charges again
© Copyright LexisNexis 2024. All rights reserved.
Far too much ink has been spilled attempting to distinguish between fixed and floating charges, so I will keep this brief. It was prompted by reading Sarah Worthington’s article in this journal last year (‘Fixed and floating charges: still favouring absolutism over multi-factored nuance’ (2023) 9 JIBFL 583). My purpose is twofold: to argue that distinguishing between fixed and floating charges is both conceptually impossible and commercially pointless; and then to suggest how the law might be reformed.
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.
