|
PEB Report - June 13, 2001 (5874 words) |
 | Revised Article 9 provides for a uniform effective date of July 1, 2001 (the “Effective Date”).(1) As of June 13, 2001, revised Article 9 has been adopted in 47 states(2) and the District of Columbia and is scheduled to become effective in all of those jurisdictions except four(3) on the Effective Date. |
| Second, the choice of law rule under former Article 9 directs the court in the Forum State to apply the choice of law rules (rather than the local substantive law) of the state in which the debtor is located, as determined under former § 9-103(3)(d). |
| Nor does this Report address choice of law rules for determining attachment(16) of a security interest, the effect of perfection or non-perfection of a security interest, priority of a security interest, enforcement of a security interest, or the rights of account debtors and other persons obligated on collateral in which a security interest is claimed. |
| Choice of Law in a Federal System and an Internal Market (14403 words) |
| The problem is that to achieve uniformity, somebody has to decree a uniform rule, or all states concerned have to agree on a uniform rule. |
| As long as there is no uniform rule that can serve as a benchmark for states' choice-of-law rules, the latter cannot be censored for not conforming with that (nonexistent) uniform benchmark. |
| Irrespective of whether choice-of-law rules are uniformized or not, it might be possible to design choice-of-law rules such as to reduce the inevitable burdens resulting from diversity of substantive rules. |
Feeds |
Contact