Примеры использования Acquisition financing transaction на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
The only new term is the generic concept"acquisition financing transaction.
Still another form of acquisition financing transaction may not even involve a contract of sale at all.
These same principles should regulate the transition in relation to acquisition financing transactions.
Acquisition financing transactions are among the most important sources of credit for many businesses.
In the past, States have taken a wide variety of approaches to regulating acquisition financing transactions.
Acquisition financing transactions are among the most important sources of credit for many buyers of tangible assets.
For example, in many States, the sale of automobiles normally involves an acquisition financing transaction.
As noted, these consensual acquisition financing transactions can take many forms and involve many different providers of credit.
In addition, they can vary widely among States even in respect of the same type of acquisition financing transaction.
Yet another acquisition financing transaction that takes the form of a lease is what many States label a"financial lease" or a"finance lease.
However, that the competition is between two claimants,each of whom is asserting rights arising from an acquisition financing transaction.
In many respects, acquisition financing transactions are identical to ordinary secured transactions as described in previous sections of the Guide.
In a few cases, however, the competition could be between two claimants,each of whom is asserting rights arising from an acquisition financing transaction.
That said, even when States adopt a non-unitary approach to acquisition financing transactions, they should design the regime to reflect the functional equivalence principle see recommendation 185.
This chapter considers the ways in which States may achieve an efficient andeffective regime to govern all types of acquisition financing transaction.
States that do not treat all acquisition financing transactions in the same way impose widely varying requirements for making acquisition rights effective as between the parties.
Section A.4 sets out the key policy choices that confront States enacting legislation to govern the various types of acquisition financing transaction.
In that connection, the suggestion was made that acquisition financing transactions relating to intellectual property should be treated in a similar way as acquisition financing transactions relating to tangible assets.
In other words, in most States with such systems, there can never be a direct competition between a lender claiming rights under an acquisition financing transaction and a seller or lessor.
For this reason, the Guide recommends that third-party effectiveness of all types of acquisition financing transaction(whether denominated as security rights, retention of title, financial leases or in some other manner) usually be dependant on the registration of a notice in the general security rights registry.
It was also observed that whether tangible property constituted inventory depended on whether it was held as inventory by the grantor for example,the buyer in an acquisition financing transaction.
When the obligation being secured is the payment of the purchase price ofa tangible asset(that is, where an acquisition financing transaction is involved), a conceptually more complex issue is presented, since the parties involved are not all lenders.
Under the unitary approach, the term includes a creditor's rights in the property under a retention-of-title sale, hire-purchase transaction, financial lease or other acquisition financing transaction;
The precise manner in which these requirements may be transposed to regulating the effectiveness of the rights flowing from an acquisition financing transaction as between the parties will depend on whether a State adopts the unitary or non-unitary approach.
In these States, it is the fact that ownership is never transferred that distinguishes a lease from a title-retention sale, butthis transfer is not relevant to whether the transaction should be characterized as an acquisition financing transaction.
The precise manner in which these requirements may be transposed to regulating the effectiveness of the rights flowing from an acquisition financing transaction as between the parties will depend on whether a State adopts what has been called a"unitary" or a"non-unitary" approach.
An acquisition financing transaction exists wherever one person may claim a property right in tangible property to secure another person's obligation to pay any unpaid portion of the purchase price(or its economic equivalent), whether that right exists in favour of a seller, a lessor or a lender.
To achieve this result, they would have to ensure that the rules governing effectiveness as between the partieswould be functionally equivalent, regardless of the form of the acquisition financing transaction see recommendation 185.
Where States require registration in the acquisition financing context, most seek to enhance the efficiency of the registration process by providing sellers and other suppliers of acquisition credit with a short"grace period"(e.g. 20 or 30 days) after delivery of the assets sold orleased to register a notice relating to the acquisition financing transaction in question.
Whenever a business acquires the ownership(or title) or the right to use, transform and dispose of raw materials, inventory or equipment on credit and offers rights in the property being acquired as security for the credit being extended, it is engaged in a particular form of secured transaction, which this Guide calls an acquisition financing transaction.