{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017754868270332187, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005154639175257732, 'mean_word_length': 5.024137931034483, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Secured Transactions Law Reform Project: Registration Discussion Paper

This paper was written as part of the policy paper series produced by the Secured Transactions Law Reform Project, which exists to consider the need for and shape of reform in this area of law in the UK, as well as to study and inform discussion about the reform of secured transactions law around the world. The paper is a working paper intended to stimulate discussion. The paper considers, in some detail, arguments relating to different registration systems and sets out for discussion two possible schemes: a notice filing scheme and a priority notice scheme. It is an attempt to articulate some of the arguments for and against these two different types of systems, and to identify further arguments relating to the shape and operation of a modern secured transactions register. It is assumed that the most modern technology would be available. Section 2 of the paper considers the rationales for registration, section 3 sets out the parameters resulting from the agreed core of a modern secured transactions law and the arguments for and against each parameter, and section 4 considers what information should be included in the register. Section 5 looks at two specific problems: identification (which arises particularly when non-corporate debtors are included) and empty filing (which arises particularly from advance filing). Section 6 compares document filing and notice filings, section 7 sets out the two schemes and section 8 concludes. The discussion, particularly in sections 5 and 7, is informed by comparative analysis of a number of notice filing systems. This analysis is included in four appendices, which account, in part, for the length of the paper.