Enforcing Russian security

New regime needs tweaks

June 01, 2009


Good news for foreign creditors, especially for the risk of a security provider going insolvent

When a creditor takes security the two most important goals are first, obtaining a proprietary interest in the secured assets that will remain effective if the security provider becomes insolvent, and second, enforcing the security to discharge secured indebtedness at the time, and in the manner, it deems appropriate.

Until recently, the biggest practical difficulty with enforcing Russian security was that a creditor was in practice unable to avoid recourse to the courts. And any secured assets had to be sold at a public auction. The priority of the secured creditor was also curtailed if the security provider becoming insolvent. This placed Russian companies at a disadvantage when competing for international financing.

A new federal law (effective January 11 2009) amended a number of acts to improve these issues. It should be noted that Russian law sets out specific regimes for enforcing security against certain assets (such as residential apartments...




These so-called experts will be conservative in their approvals

A Korean in-house on the chances of the pre-approval committee allowing new OTC products

Web seminars

US and EU hybrid capital
February 3 2010
The future of hybrids, in a popular discussion between IFLR, Morrison & Foerster and Calyon

Latest Issue

March 2010

Basel III: The revenge of Basel
New Basel rules are affecting everyone differently. In the UK banks are worried about grandfathering, in Germany the headache is hybrids and in the US it's risk structures. Meanwhile Japan has some tips and Hong Kong structured its first hybrid [more]