Panttausilmoitukseen julkivarmistustapana kohdistuva muutospaine saatavien panttauksen ja julkisuusperiaatteen näkökulmasta
Avainsanat:
esineoikeus, panttausilmoitus, julkisuusperiaate, saatavan panttaus, sivullissuojaAbstrakti
Pressure to change the notification requirement for third-party effectiveness from the perspective of a pledge of receivables and the principle of publicity
In Finland, a pledge of a receivable binding on third parties requires the submission of a pledge notification (denunciation) to the debtor. The international trend has been to abandon requirements such as the pledge notification as a condition for third-party commitment, as it is considered to be expensive, impractical and directly harmful to the use of modern financing arrangements based on the use of receivables as security. There is no similar development in Finland, but the requirement for a pledge notification is rather strictly followed. It is derived from the principle of publicity, which is considered to be one of the most important principles of property law and which the pledge notification as a means of third-party effectiveness is regarded to implement. In this article, I will point out that there is pressure to change the notification requirement both from the point of view of the practical legal system and the achievement of the objectives of the principle of publicity. In order to support the appropriate use of receivables as security, such a third-party effectiveness method would be needed that allows the pledging of receivables arising in the future to be binding on third parties and would not require the time-consuming and expensive submission and monitoring of notifications. In addition, the pledge notification only fulfils the objective of the principle of publicity concerning the verification of the time of pledging, while the most important objective of the principle – achieving publicity by making the pledge visible to third parties – is highly questionable.
