I se spunea „Buldozerul”
They called it the „Bulldozer”

On the competing claims between the freezing lien and the security interest

Summary/Abstract: In recent period, a great deal of media talks was generated by few court decisions emphasizing the „conflict” between a securing measure (the freezing lien) and a security interest (the mortgage). The participants in the debate took sides, arguments were employed on several layers (from moral to philosophical), and it was even asked the High Court to rule on the matter by a general ruling…This article tries to present the legal aspects of the matter and to contribute to lowering the tone of the debate. We consider that there is no more than a simple case of competing claims. As such, the debate is no longer about which side has a prevailing position (because of serving a greater interest) but rather who takes priority in normal circumstances. Even if the public debate focused on the criminal sequestration we choose to present all forms of freezing liens (criminal, tax and civil) in order to define a common legal regime. We believe we succeeded in showing that all securing measures are no more than specific forms of security interests being as such compatible with the regular security interest, i.e. the mortgage.The approach started from the (civil law) basis of secured transactions in order to look into the effects of each of the freezing lien and security interest have on the assets of the debtor. Once these issues are clarified, we moved on to analyze how the freezing lien (either criminal, tax or civil) could interfere with a security interest attached to the same collateral. In this manner we saw the specific effects of the two institutions and the way they can coexist (in peace).

• Details
• Contents