Machine interpretation of the French question — to understand, never to cite

Is the protection of the debtor's assets through the non-seizability of fiduciary assets compatible with the limitation to only real securities provided for in Article 4?

A incompatibility could call into question the legality of the trust‑security.

Produced by a model, unverified. The original question, in French, is what stands. The evidence below is in its original language.

The provision in question

article 4 du Acte uniforme révisé portant organisation des sûretés

Evidence (original language)

Le commentaire conclut que la fiducie‑sûreté offre une protection préventive et curative grâce à l’insaisissabilité du patrimoine fiduciaire, alors que l’article 4 limite les sûretés aux réelles.

How does the fiducie-sûreté, introduced by the revised 2010 OHADA Uniform Act on Securities, protect the debtor's patrimony when the debtor company faces financial difficulties and collective proceedings? · OHADA.com Doctrine

← Back to the original question