Amending secured facilities — do I need new security?
By Adam Pierce and Charlotte Drake
It is a question that lenders and their lawyers have to consider every time the terms of a secured transaction change. Will the existing security remain effective following the amendment? Demanding new security routinely, without proper analysis, is rarely a viable approach. Taking new security need not be complicated, but it will cost money, usually the borrower’s money. It will involve new documents, satisfaction of any registration and other perfection requirements, and sometimes new legal opinions.
Even if a lender takes all these steps, new security may not put it in as strong a position as the original security. For example, a new floating charge may be subject to new hardening periods. On the other hand, if a lender assumes it can rely on its existing security without proper thought, it may find itself unsecured.
So, before agreeing amendments, a lender needs to understand whether there is a genuine risk that its existing security will no longer work. Here we explain the key points to consider…
Click on the link below to read the rest of the Dentons briefing.
News from Dentons
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Dentons
The dispute actually began in July 2011 between the UK-based Caters News Agency, who had hired Slater to do a nature shoot in Indonesia, and the blog Techdirt.
Dentons highlights lessons that can be learned from the Humphrey case and provides advice for navigating the risks associated with internal investigations in China.
Analysis from The Lawyer
The continent’s boom in natural resources and renewable energy is sparking an infrastructure drive
Shearman & Sterling is making its presence felt in the City, squaring up to magic circle firms and looking to muscle in on key relationships. Private equity house Bridgepoint is one outfit that has had its head turned by the US firm.