| Popis: |
This article addresses the desirability of ratification of the Convention on international interests in mobile equipment and the Air Equipment Protocol from a Dutch point of view. In doing so, the author only speaks out on the legal aspects of ratification, not paying attention to the economic benefits that the drafters of the Convention predict. The main obstacle to ratification seems to be the rather fundamental differences between the provisions on default in the CIME and their counterparts in the Dutch Civil Code. These differences, however, do not validate non-ratification of the CIME. In the first place because the Dutch provisions on non-performance and default have themselves been heavily criticized in Dutch legal literature and are far too complex to be practical. In the second place the CIME allows the Dutch Government to make adjustments by means of declarations to be made by the Government upon ratification. Finally, there are important similarities between the CIME and the Principles of European Contract Law, whose purpose is to serve as a ‘model for judicial and legislative development of contract law’ and which indeed have already begun to function as such. The kinship between CIME and PECL in itself therefore advocates ratification. These three considerations outweigh all the reservations and objections which we may have concerning the rather hard and fast, creditor-oriented provisions in the CIME. |
