pillsburylaw.com
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
Second Edition
March 2017
World Aircraft
Repossession Index
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING: Results depend on a number of factors unique to each matter.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 1540 Broadway, New York, NY 10036, +1.888.387.5714.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP. All rights reserved.
pillsburylaw.com
Abu Dhabi
•
Austin
•
Beijing
•
Dubai
•
Hong Kong
•
Houston
•
London
•
Los Angeles
•
Miami
•
Nashville
•
New York
•
Northern Virginia
•
Palm Beach
Sacramento
•
San Diego
•
San Diego North County
•
San Francisco
•
Shanghai
•
Silicon Valley
•
Tokyo
•
Washington, DC
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
World Aircraft
Repossession Index
SECOND EDITION
covering 72 jurisdictions worldwide
March 2017
Executive Editor
MARK N. LESSARD
Partner | mark.lessard@pillsburylaw.com
Executive Editor
PAUL P. JEBELY
Partner | paul.jebely@pillsburylaw.com
Executive Editor
JONATHAN C. GOLDSTEIN
Partner | jonathan.goldstein@pillsburylaw.com
General Editor
JASON. P. GREENBERG
Special Counsel | jason.greenberg@pillsburylaw.com
Co-Editor
SARAH HUMPLEBY
Counsel | sarah.humpleby@pillsburylaw.com
Co-Editor
SHARON NOURANI
Associate | sharon.nourani@pillsburylaw.com
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
2
Disclaimers
Please read the following disclaimers, which apply to all material contained in this publication, before using it. The material
in this publication is provided subject to the following disclaimers.
(1) The material contained in each “One-Page Summary” and the “Local Counsel Explanatory Notes” section of this publication
has not been provided by Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP (“Pillsbury”) unless otherwise stated. Instead, it has been
provided by the law firm(s) and the person(s) / contributor(s) indicated in such summary or notes.
(2) This publication is issued to inform Pillsbury clients and other interested parties of the current legal climate in certain
countries and jurisdictions that may be of interest to them in relation to aircraft, and no other use of this publication or the
material contained in this publication is permitted. The material contained herein does not constitute the legal opinion,
business advice or other advice of Pillsbury, any other law firm or any person(s) or contributor(s) identified in this publication.
The material contained in this publication is not, and should not be regarded as, a substitute for legal or business advice.
(3) NO READER MAY RELY ON THIS PUBLICATION OR THE MATERIAL CONTAINED HEREIN AS ANY FORM OF
LEGAL, BUSINESS OR OTHER ADVICE OR OPINION. EACH OF THE EXECUTIVE EDITORS, THE GENERAL EDITOR,
EACH OF THE CO-EDITORS, PILLSBURY, EACH OF THE CONTRIBUTING AUTHOR(S) AND EACH OF THEIR
RESPECTIVE LAW FIRMS, AND EACH OTHER CONTRIBUTOR TO THIS PUBLICATION EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS
ALL LIABILITY TO ANY PERSON WITH RESPECT TO ANYTHING DONE OR OMITTED TO BE DONE, AND WITH
RESPECT TO THE CONSEQUENCES OF ANYTHING DONE OR OMITTED TO BE DONE, WHOLLY OR PARTLY IN
RELIANCE UPON THE WHOLE OR ANY PART OF THE MATERIAL CONTAINED IN THIS PUBLICATION.
(4) THE MATERIAL PROVIDED IN THIS PUBLICATION IS GENERAL AND MAY NOT APPLY IN A SPECIFIC
SITUATION. Subject to the foregoing, material provided in this publication provides a general estimate and preliminary
indication only as to the current legal climate in relation to repossessing, deregistering and exporting aircraft from the
country and jurisdiction(s) indicated, based on information received from local counsel in such country and/or jurisdiction
as of the date indicated. The actual likelihood of success for any specific set of circumstances will depend on the particular
facts and parties involved. READERS MUST OBTAIN ACTUAL AND UP-TO-DATE LEGAL AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL
ADVICE IN THE RELEVANT JURISDICTION(S) WITH RESPECT TO ANY SPECIFIC SITUATION THAT MAY RELATE
TO MATERIAL PROVIDED IN THIS PUBLICATION.
(5) THE MATERIAL PROVIDED IN THIS PUBLICATION DOES NOT REPRESENT AN EXHAUSTIVE ANALYSIS of all
legal issues in the country and/or jurisdiction(s) indicated relevant to financing, leasing, repossessing, registering, deregistering
and/or exporting aircraft in or from such country and/or jurisdiction. There are relevant issues not addressed herein and
further legal, business and other professional advice in the relevant country and/or jurisdiction(s) should be sought.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING. Results depend on a number of factors unique to each matter. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
3
Contents
Disclaimers....................................... 2
Preface ........................................... 5
About the Editors ................................. 6
The Pillsbury Asset Finance Team .................. 8
About Pillsbury .................................. 10
Methodology and Interpretation of Results..........11
Summary of Scores................................17
Aruba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
One-page Summary
Australia ........................................20
One-page Summary
Austria ...........................................21
One-page Summary
Azerbaijan ...................................... 22
One-page Summary
Belgium......................................... 23
One-page Summary
Bermuda ........................................24
One-page Summary
Brazil ...........................................25
One-page Summary
Bulgaria.........................................26
One-page Summary
Canada.......................................... 27
ARTICLE
Catch Me If You Can: Prelude To An Aircraft Repo....28
Cayman Islands ..................................31
One-page Summary
China ...........................................32
One-page Summary
Costa Rica....................................... 33
One-page Summary
Czech Republic..................................34
One-page Summary
Denmark........................................35
One-page Summary
Dominican Republic .............................36
One-page Summary
Egypt ........................................... 37
One-page Summary
El Salvador......................................38
One-page Summary
Estonia .........................................39
One-page Summary
Fiji..............................................40
One-page Summary
Finland ......................................... 41
One-page Summary
ARTICLE
Mortgagee Duties: PK Airfinance Sarl
v Alpstream AG...................................42
France ..........................................44
One-page Summary
French Polynesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
One-page Summary
Germany ........................................46
One-page Summary
Guatemala ......................................47
One-page Summary
Guernsey........................................48
One-page Summary
Hong Kong ......................................49
One-page Summary
Hungary ........................................50
One-page Summary
India.............................................51
One-page Summary
Indonesia .......................................52
One-page Summary
Ireland.......................................... 53
One-page Summary
ARTICLE
Aviation Finance Unchained: The Potential
Application of Blockchain Technology ...............54
Israel ...........................................56
One-page Summary
Italy ............................................ 57
One-page Summary
Japan ...........................................58
One-page Summary
Jersey...........................................59
One-page Summary
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
4
CONTENTS
Jordan ..........................................60
One-page Summary
Kenya ........................................... 61
One-page Summary
Korea ...........................................62
One-page Summary
Latvia...........................................63
One-page Summary
Lebanon ........................................64
One-page Summary
Lithuania .......................................65
One-page Summary
Macau ..........................................66
One-page Summary
Malaysia ........................................ 67
One-page Summary
Mauritius .......................................68
One-page Summary
Mexico..........................................69
One-page Summary
Mozambique . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
One-page Summary
Myanmar ........................................71
One-page Summary
Namibia......................................... 72
One-page Summary
Netherlands..................................... 73
One-page Summary
New Caledonia .................................. 74
One-page Summary
New Zealand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
One-page Summary
Nigeria.......................................... 76
One-page Summary
ARTICLE
Applicability of U.S. Risk Retention Rules
to Structured Aircraft Portfolio Transactions ........ 77
Norway .........................................82
One-page Summary
Oman ...........................................83
One-page Summary
Pakistan ........................................84
One-page Summary
Papua New Guinea ..............................85
One-page Summary
Peru ............................................86
One-page Summary
Poland .......................................... 87
One-page Summary
Portugal ........................................88
One-page Summary
Romania ........................................89
One-page Summary
Russia ..........................................90
One-page Summary
Rwanda ......................................... 91
One-page Summary
Slovenia.........................................92
One-page Summary
South Africa ....................................93
One-page Summary
Sri Lanka........................................94
One-page Summary
Switzerland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
One-page Summary
Taiwan (Republic of China) ......................96
One-page Summary
Turkey.......................................... 97
One-page Summary
Ukraine .........................................98
One-page Summary
United Arab Emirates ...........................99
One-page Summary
United Kingdom................................100
One-page Summary
United States....................................101
One-page Summary
Vietnam........................................102
One-page Summary
ARTICLE
All Hat and No Chattel: Does Aircraft Lease
Chattel Paper Still Matter After Cape Town? .......103
Local Counsel Explanatory Notes................. 107
World Map ......................................118
About the Contributors ..........................120
Third Party Data Notes ..........................148
Appendix: 30-Minute (Check-Box)
Jurisdictional Questionnaire ..................... 149
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
5
Preface
World Aircraft Repossession Index
Second Edition
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP is pleased to publish this Second Edition of the World Aircraft
Repossession Index.
This edition of the World Aircraft Repossession Index covers 72 popular jurisdictions worldwide in which
aircraft are registered and operate. Utilizing seven primary criteria and a proprietary scoring methodology,
you will find a one-page summary for each jurisdiction which summarizes the expert analysis provided by
reputable local counsel and certain key data obtained from other third-party sources.
The attorneys in Pillsbury’s Asset Finance practice are well aware of the challenges of leasing and financing
aircraft in countries around the globe. When considering doing business in any jurisdiction, it is always
advisable to learn about the local issues that may have an impact on your investment. Prudent lessors and
financiers of aircraft will want to know in advance what challenges they might encounter in the event they
need to repossess, deregister and export an aircraft while it is registered or located in a foreign jurisdiction.
Analyzing jurisdictional questionnaires from legal counsel is often an important part of gathering this
knowledge. However, processing the narrative responses contained in traditional jurisdictional question-
naires and comparing such responses across various jurisdictions can be a time consuming and costly
endeavor. This publication aims to help change that.
Pillsbury has developed a “check-box” jurisdictional questionnaire (the form of which can be found in the
Appendix to this publication), which forms the foundation of our proprietary scoring system. Utilizing
this innovative framework, the World Aircraft Repossession Index presents a one-page summary for each
jurisdiction, which provides a helpful overview and focuses on the most common issues encountered in the
context of aircraft repossession, deregistration and export. Our objective scoring methodology then allows
us to rank each jurisdiction on a consistent basis across all of these common issues, as well as provide an
overall ranking for each jurisdiction.
Based on the data provided by local counsel and certain third-party data providers, the World Aircraft
Repossession Index numerically scores the legal environment for repossessing aircraft in each participating
jurisdiction. The results of our analysis are also represented in a chart and world map, indicating the compar-
ative ranking that has been assigned to each jurisdiction covered by the World Aircraft Repossession Index.
Please read the disclaimer on page 2 before using any of the information contained in this publication.
We gratefully acknowledge and would like to thank all of the contributors in each jurisdiction, as well as
each of our third-party data providers for dedicating their time, free of charge, to make this publication
possible. Special thanks to Ms. Crystal Siu, a prized Asset Finance paralegal based in Pillsbury’s Hong Kong
oce, whose eorts in support of this publication were above and beyond the call of duty. We would also
like to give due recognition to Mr. Dominic Pearson, formerly of Pillsbury, who created the World Aircraft
Repossession Index and served as the general editor of the first edition of this publication. Many thanks
to you all!
JASON P. GREENBERG
Special Counsel | Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
T 213.488.7344 | F 213.629.1033
jason.greenberg@pillsburylaw.com
Los Angeles, March 2017
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
6
About the Editors
Mark N. Lessard, Partner and Global Head, Finance
Mark Lessard is a partner in Pillsbury’s New York oce and is the Global Head of the firm’s
Finance practice, primarily representing clients who are active in the Aviation, Aerospace and
Transportation sectors. Mr. Lessard represents lenders, lessors, investors, operators, underwriters,
liquidity providers, manufacturers, rating agencies and trustees in connection with all forms
of transportation asset-backed financings, including term loans and revolving credit facilities,
operating leases, leveraged and tax leases, as well as private placements and other capital markets
oerings, such as portfolio securitizations, EETCs and debt repackagings. Mr. Lessard has particular
experience in cross-border transactions, having placed, financed or repossessed aviation assets in
dozens of jurisdictions around the world. He is an active member of the Executive Committee of
the Legal Advisory Panel to the Aviation Working Group, which has been at the forefront of the
adoption and implementation of the Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile
Equipment. Mr. Lessard is a Member of the Legal Advisory Panel to Aviation Working Group (2012-
present), and is recognized in the following publications: Chambers USA, Aviation Finance—National
(2009-2016); Legal 500 US, Asset Finance and Leasing (2010, 2013-2016); International Who’s Who
of Aviation Lawyers (2010-2013); Who’s Who Legal, Aviation—New York (2010, 2012, 2014-2016);
and Guide to the World’s Leading Aviation Lawyers, Euromoney/Legal Media Group (2013).
Paul P. Jebely, Partner and Co-Leader, Asset Finance
Paul Jebely is the managing partner of Pillsbury’s Hong Kong oce and a co-leader of the firm’s
Asset Finance practice. He is recognized as a leading aviation lawyer, advising a range of clients on
billions of dollars of commercial and business aircraft finance transactions. Mr. Jebely has been
repeatedly recognized by legal directories such as Chambers, Legal 500 and Who’s Who as a “very
highly rated” leading individual in aviation finance and singled out in Chambers as “extremely
competent,” “commercially aware,” “responsive,” “courteous,” “technically skilled,” “capable,”
“attentive” and “driven.” He has been quoted by the Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg,
the China Business Network and various industry publications on the basis of his experience in
the aviation markets in Asia and Africa in particular. Among other recognition, he was the 2015
recipient of the “Outstanding Contribution to African Aviation Development” award—the only
lawyer to receive the award since its inception in 1999, and was recognized by Asian Legal Business
in October 2016 among “Asia 40 Under 40” top “brightest legal minds in the region.”
Mr. Jebely is admitted to practice law in England, New York and Ontario. He is experienced in
negotiating and executing international commercial and business aircraft and engine financing,
leasing and trading transactions, and in advising in various enforcement and repossession situa-
tions. He has advised clients that represent the full range of industry participants in transactions
concerning all classes of commercial and business aircraft. He is currently the Chairman of the
Community of Hong Kong Aviation Professionals, and a member of the Board of Governors of the
Asian Business Aviation Association.
Mark N. Lessard
+1.212.858.1564
mark.lessard@pillsburylaw.com
Paul P. Jebely
+852.3959.7503
paul.jebely@pillsburylaw.com
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
7
ABOUT THE EDITORS
Jonathan C. Goldstein, Partner, Asset Finance
Jonathan Goldstein is a partner in Pillsbury’s Asset Finance practice and is located in the
New York oce. He is recognized as a leading lawyer and rising star servicing the aviation
and rail industries. Mr. Goldstein represents sponsors, lenders, hedge funds, commercial
banks and leasing companies in connection with a broad spectrum of international financial
and corporate transactions. He advises clients on public oerings and private placement of
securities (equipment notes and portfolio securitizations), acquisitions, leveraged leasing,
secured and unsecured lending, structured financings, syndicated credit facilities, pre-delivery
payment financing and warehouse facilities. Mr. Goldstein’s practice also addresses simple
and complex bank loans, mergers and acquisitions, leveraged financings, joint ventures, sale/
resale transactions and bankruptcy workouts.
Legal 500 notes that “Mr. Goldstein has a very good reputation in aviation finance.” He has been
involved with numerous transactions that have won awards, including Overall Deal of the Year,
North American Deal of the Year and Most Innovative Deal of the Year from AirFinance Journal.
Jason P. Greenberg, Special Counsel, Asset Finance
Jason Greenberg is a special counsel in Pillsbury’s Asset Finance practice and is located in
the Los Angeles oce. His practice focuses on equipment finance and leasing, and specializes
in cross-border secured lending and commercial aircraft transactions. Mr. Greenberg has
significant experience representing lenders, borrowers, lessors, lessees, purchasers, sellers
and rating agencies, and managing transactions in jurisdictions throughout the world. Prior
to joining Pillsbury, Mr. Greenberg worked at two global top-10 commercial aircraft lessors
and in the aviation finance practice of a major international law firm.
Sarah Humpleby, Counsel, Asset Finance
Sarah Humpleby is a counsel in Pillsbury’s Asset Finance practice and is based in the London
oce. She has a broad range of asset finance experience in aircraft, rolling stock, shipping and
other equipment leasing as well as a background in general banking and finance. Ms. Humpleby
acts for clients across the aviation industry including major operating lessors, financiers and
airlines, and for operating lessors of rolling stock and has previously spent time on secondment
with Barclays. Ms. Humpleby was named as a rising star in aviation in the Airfinance Journal’s
Guide to Aviation Lawyers 2013 and in the Euromoney Rising Stars Expert Guide 2016.
Sharon Nourani, Associate, Asset Finance
Sharon Nourani is an associate in Pillsbury’s Asset Finance practice and is based in the Hong
Kong oce. She advises key clients on a broad range of cross-border, high-value aircraft finance
transactions, including finance and operating leases, sale and leasebacks, pre-delivery payment
financings and secured loan transactions.
Prior to joining Pillsbury, Ms. Nourani worked in Hong Kong in the aviation finance practice
of an international law firm.
Jonathan C. Goldstein
+1.212.858.1888
jonathan.goldstein@pillsburylaw.com
Jason P. Greenberg
+1.213.488.7344
jason.greenberg@pillsburylaw.com
Sarah Humpleby
+44.20.7847.9544
sarah.humpleby@pillsburylaw.com
Sharon Nourani
+852.3959.7506
sharon.nourani@pillsburylaw.com
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
8
The Pillsbury Asset Finance Team
Mark N. Lessard | Partner &
Global Head of Finance
+1.212.858.1564
mark.lessard@pillsburylaw.com
Paul Jebely | Partner &
Co-leader of Asset Finance
+852.3959.7503
paul.jebely@pillsburylaw.com
Graham Tyler | Partner &
Co-leader of Asset Finance
+44.20.7847.9562
graham.tyler@pillsburylaw.com
Charlotta Otterbeck | Partner &
Leader of Asset Finance for the Americas
+1.212.858.1409
charlotta.otterbeck@pillsburylaw.com
Debra Erni | Partner
+44.20.7847.9595
debra.erni@pillsburylaw.com
Vanessa C. Gage | Partner
+1.415.983.1040
vanessa.gage@pillsburylaw.com
Jonathan C. Goldstein | Partner
+1.212.858.1888
jonathan.goldstein@pillsburylaw.com
Daniel M. Richards | Partner
+1.212.858.1324
daniel.richards@pillsburylaw.com
Jason P. Greenberg | Special Counsel
+1.213.488.7344
jason.greenberg@pillsburylaw.com
Adam Beavill | Counsel
+44.20.7847.9586
adam.beavill@pillsburylaw.com
Michael C. Berens | Counsel
+1.212.858.1135
michael.berens@pillsburylaw.com
Richard J. Evans | Counsel
+1.213.488.7192
richard.evans@pillsburylaw.com
Sarah Humpleby | Counsel
+44.20.7847.9544
sarah.humpleby@pillsburylaw.com
Melissa B. Jones-Prus | Counsel
+1.212.858.1646
melissa.jonesprus@pillsburylaw.com
Maria J. Cho | Senior Associate
+1.212.858.1452
maria.cho@pillsburylaw.com
Rakhi Savjani | Senior Associate
+44.20.7847.9578
rakhi.savjani@pillsburylaw.com
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
9
THE PILLSBURY ASSET FINANCE TEAM
Andrés Berry | Associate
+1.212.858.1238
andres.berry@pillsburylaw.com
William DeCotiis | Associate
+1.212.858.1239
william.decotiis@pillsburylaw.com
Luca Denora | Associate
+852.3959.7504
luca.denora@pillsburylaw.com
David Flickinger | Associate
+1.212.858.1041
david.ickinger@pillsburylaw.com
John A. Hunt | Associate
+1.212.858.1095
john.hunt@pillsburylaw.com
Chris Knight | Associate
+44.20.7847.9640
chris.knight@pillsburylaw.com
E Way Liow | Associate
+852.3959.7505
eway.liow@pillsburylaw.com
Sharon Nourani | Associate
+852.3959.7506
sharon.nourani@pillsburylaw.com
Maureen J. Reed | Associate
+1.212.858.1257
maureen.reed@pillsburylaw.com
Andrew Taggart | Associate
+1.415.983.1108
andrew.taggart@pillsburylaw.com
Ella Bouet | Senior Law Clerk
+1.415.983.7223
ella.bouet@pillsburylaw.com
Golda Calonge | Senior Law Clerk
+1.212.858.1229
golda.calonge@pillsburylaw.com
Issac M. Lee | Senior Law Clerk
+1.212.858.1253
issac.lee@pillsburylaw.com
Bernadette E. Ryan | Senior Legal Analyst
+1.213.488.7139
bernadette.ryan@pillsburylaw.com
Luke Drake | Paralegal
+44.20.7847.9587
luke.drake@pillsburylaw.com
Anny Espinal | Paralegal
+1.212.858.1069
anny.espinal@pillsburylaw.com
Kanika Juyal | Paralegal
+44.20.7847.9533
kanika.juyal@pillsburylaw.com
Crystal Siu | Paralegal
+852.3959.7509
crystal.siu@pillsburylaw.com
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
10
About Pillsbury
Pillsbury’s Asset Finance practice is a leader in the field of structuring, negotiating and
closing transactions for transportation assets, with particular emphasis on aircraft and other
aviation equipment. For more than 60 years we have been representing some of the most
active international participants in the financing of transportation assets, including major
banks, leasing companies, airlines, investors, traders and manufacturers.
Powered by a team of highly rated lawyers in the U.S., Europe
and Asia, Pillsbury’s Asset Finance practice has, in the last
5 years alone, helped a diverse range of market participants
keep more than 1,500 commerical aircraft flying, reflecting
an aggregate asset value of more than $75 billion. We have
had important roles in all of the U.S., and many foreign,
airline bankruptcies and restructurings and work closely
with lawyers in our restructuring group on these matters.
Our team also has significant experience with railroad rolling
stock, locomotives, ships, containers and fleets of land-based
vehicles, as well as other capital assets financed with similar
techniques, such as floating drilling rigs, satellites, telecom-
munications and manufacturing equipment. In recent years
we have successfully negotiated and documented Ex-Im
Bank-supported financings for equipment valued at more
than $4 billion. We have also dealt with other export credit
agencies and government-supported programs, such as
Japan Eximbank, ECGD, COFACE and HERMES.
Pillsbury’s Asset Finance practice includes attorneys in our
New York, London, Hong Kong, Los Angeles, San Francisco
and Washington D.C. oces who are supported by leading
practitioners in related fields such as taxation, aviation
regulatory, restructuring, capital markets, mergers and acqui-
sitions, international trade and licensing, corporate aviation,
insurance, accident investigations and litigation. Our team
has extensive experience with cross-border financings of
transportation assets located and operated throughout the
world and often handles large scale transactions involving
multiple jurisdictions. Our oces and network of local law
firms stand ready to assist our clients any place, any time.
This broad-based, integrated approach allows us to oer a
full range of legal services to all industry participants.
Our Asset Finance attorneys are well-known in the industry
for their cutting edge contributions whether completing
novel transactions, publishing articles on new financing
techniques, sitting on standard-setting committees or
speaking at some of the many conferences, seminars,
workshops and other events organized for the asset
finance community. These contributions are consistently
recognized by industry observers, including the prestigious
Chambers publication, which has named us one of the
leading aviation finance firms in the world. We have also
recently received awards and accolades for our legal work
from Jane’s Transport Finance, AirFinance Journal, Global
Trade Review and Trade Finance.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
11
Methodology and Interpretation of Results
It is critical to note that there exist many avenues for mitigating the risks that result in the
designation of a particular country as being “HIGHER RISK”, including registering an aircraft
in an alternate jurisdiction. Creating an index of this sort poses two big challenges. Firstly, in
order to allow quantitative based scoring, the jurisdictional questionnaire must be crafted in a
way that allows the questions to be eciently and comfortably answered by local counsel in a
closed-ended fashion without qualification; that is, by selecting an answer from a pre-defined
set of responses (such as “Yes” or “No”). Secondly, having boxed-in those answers so as to
allow for scoring, careful consideration must be given to how the jurisdiction may be scored
in a meaningful and useful manner. The first of these challenges has been accomplished by the
creation of what we have called the 30-Minute (Check-Box) Jurisdictional Questionnaire.
The second of these challenges has been accomplished by generating a simple but eective
weighted scoring mechanism. You should read this section to understand better what the results
contained in the one-page summaries mean, and how to interpret them.
The Pillsbury World Aircraft Repossession Index measures
the legal environment for aircraft repossessions in each
country or jurisdiction using seven factors (repossession,
insolvency, deregistration, export, judgments and arbitral
awards, preferential liens and political stability). Each
factor is assigned a weighting in accordance with its relative
importance, with each factor’s score and its weighting
being used to calculate the overall score for the country or
jurisdiction. Each factor’s score is determined according
to several sub-factors comprising either: (a) the questions
asked in the jurisdictional questionnaire, or (b) certain other
information about the jurisdiction collected from external
sources. A summary of each of the seven factors and their
component sub-factors is presented in the Table on the next
page and described in detail in the commentary below. The
baseline assumptions for this analysis are that the aircraft is
registered in the relevant jurisdiction, operated by an airline
based in such jurisdiction and located in such jurisdiction
at the time of repossession.
Overall Score and Recoverability Category. The overall
score for each jurisdiction is expressed near the top of the
page of each one-page summary. A score of 0% represents
the poorest possible score and the lowest rating in terms of
asset recoverability. In contrast, a score of 100% represents
the best possible score and the highest rating in terms of
asset recoverability. Additionally, each jurisdiction has been
assigned a broader asset recoverability rating or category
as follows: those jurisdictions whose overall score was
75% or higher have been assigned a “LOWER RISK” asset
recoverability rating; those jurisdictions whose overall score
was 50% or higher, but less than 75%, have been assigned a
“MODERATE” asset recoverability rating; and finally those
jurisdictions whose overall score was less than 50% have
been assigned a “HIGHER RISK” asset recoverability rating.
World Map. On pages 118 and 119 we have summarized the
overall scores and asset recoverability ratings of each juris-
diction in the form of a world map. The green, yellow and red
colorings represent jurisdictions whose asset recoverability
ratings are “LOWER”, “MODERATE” and “HIGHER” risk
respectively, with the finer gradient of the color indicating
whether the jurisdiction sits at the top, middle of bottom of
the range for that category.
30-Minute (Check-Box) Jurisdictional Questionnaire.
For each country or jurisdiction covered in this index, a
reputable local counsel completed a 30-Minute (Check-
Box) Jurisdictional Questionnaire. A copy of the pro-forma
jurisdictional questionnaire is provided in the Appendix
on page 149. The completed questionnaires provided the
majority of the information used to score the jurisdictions.
However, the Political Stability factor was determined using
information collected from other third-party sources.
Aircraft Registration. In the 30-Minute (Check-Box)
Jurisdictional Questionnaire, we asked local counsel to
answer questions relating to the registration of the aircraft
on the country’s aircraft register. While this information is
not scored (as it is the characteristics of deregistration of the
aircraft, not registration, that is most relevant), it serves two
purposes which we hope will be of use to readers.
Firstly, it is informative in respect of whose name the
aircraft may be registered in that jurisdiction and whether
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
12
METHODOLOGY AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
the interests of the owner and mortgagee may also be noted,
either on the aircraft register, the certificate of registration or
on some other public register. It is also informative in respect
of the existence of any delegation arrangements with other
countries, such as 83bis delegation agreements pursuant
to Article 83bis of the Chicago Convention, such that an
aircraft operating and habitually based in that country may
be registered in another country.
Secondly, because delegation arrangements allow operating
lessors and financiers to mitigate against the adverse eects
of the local aircraft registration (and deregistration) rules by
allowing an aircraft to be registered in another country, this
has allowed us to blend the deregistration score of such other
country with the scores of each of the remaining factors for
the country in which the aircraft is habitually based. This
blended score thus more accurately reflects the total aircraft
repossession risk, and is presented in the one-page summary.
Repossession by Owner-Lessor or by Mortgagee?
We have designed the questions in the 30-Minute
(Check-Box) Jurisdictional Questionnaire in a manner
that contemplates both repossession of an aircraft from a
defaulting lessee under an aircraft lease, as well as repos
-
session by a “mortgagee” from a defaulting owner-debtor.
The phrase “mortgagee” when used in this publication and
in the jurisdictional questionnaire means a person who has
a first priority security interest in the aircraft, and includes a
person in the equivalent position to a mortgagee under appli-
cable local law, such as a “pledgee”, or a “chargee” holding an
“international interest” in the airframe and aircraft engines
pursuant to the Cape Town Convention.
Factor 1: Repossession (weighting: 22.5%). This factor
evaluates the owner-lessor or mortgagee’s theoretical ability
to repossess the aircraft in a cost eective and timely manner.
This factor comprises the following sub-factors:
Self-help remedies. Credit was given if the local jurisdiction
allows the owner-lessor or mortgagee to exercise so-called
self-help remedies. “Self-help” means that the laws of the
local jurisdiction permit the owner-lessor or mortgagee, as
applicable, to repossess the aircraft from an uncooperative
lessee (or debtor) without the need to obtain a court order,
provided that it does so peaceably, without using force or
the threat of force.
Requirement for a deposit, bond or other security in judicial
proceedings. Credit was given if the courts of the jurisdiction
do not typically require the owner-lessor or mortgagee, as a
condition to obtaining a judicial order for repossession of the
aircraft, to deposit a bond or other guarantee with the court.
Repossession taxes and fees. Credit was given if there are no
significant fees or taxes payable in order for the owner-lessor
or mortgagee to obtain a judicial order for repossession
of the aircraft. An example of such a tax might include a
Table: Summary of Factors and Sub-Factors
WEIGHTING FACTORS SUB-FACTORS
22.5%
Repossession
(1) Self-help remedies; (2) Requirement for a deposit, bond or other security in judicial proceedings; (3) Repossession
taxes and fees; (4) Speed of repossession; (5) Legal cost of repossession; (6) ASU Cape Town Discount or Qualifying
OECD Status
12.5%
Insolvency
(1) Sophistication of insolvency laws; (2) Insolvency moratorium; (3) Overreaching of the lessee’s insolvency estate.
10.0%
Deregistration
(1) Third party deregistration rights; (2) Historical precedent of refusing to deregister; (3) Convenience of deregistration
10.0%
Export
(1) Third party export rights; (2) Export licenses and permits; (3) Export fees and taxes
7.5%
Judgments and
Arbitral Awards
(1) Enforceability of judgments; (2) Enforceability of arbitral awards
7.5%
Preferential Liens
(1) Onerous and unusual preferential liens: non-possessory liens; (2) Onerous and unusual preferential liens: eet-wide
liens; (3) Onerous and unusual preferential liens: liens in favor of a lessee or debtor; (4) Government requisition and
conscation.
30.0%
Political Stability
(1) OECD membership; (2) Sovereign credit rating; (3) World Justice Project – Rule of Law Index (2016); (4) Heritage
Foundation – Freedom Index (2016); (5) World Economic Forum – Global Competitiveness Report 2015-2016
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
13
METHODOLOGY AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
stamp tax payable as a condition to admitting documents
in evidence for the purposes of repossession proceedings
(where self-help remedies are not available). We left it
to local counsel to determine, using their professional
judgement, whether they thought any such fees were signif-
icant; however, we indicated that “significant” fees or taxes
would include any fees or taxes assessed on a percentage
basis against the value of the aircraft or the sum secured by
a mortgage, etc., but might exclude nominal fees or nominal
taxes amounting to less than US$1,000 or its equivalent in
the local currency of the jurisdiction.
Speed of repossession. We asked local counsel to estimate,
on the balance of probabilities, how quickly a court order
may be obtained for repossession of an aircraft, following
commencement of judicial proceedings, given a choice
of four bands: (a) less than or equal to 60 days, (b) more
than 60 days but less than or equal to 180 days, (c) more
than 180 days but less than or equal to one year, or (d) more
than one year. Greater credit was given to the faster bands.
In estimating the speed with which such order could be
obtained, we asked local counsel to ignore any self-help
remedies that may be available as an alternative means of
repossession. We also asked local counsel to assume that:
1.
the mortgagee or the owner-lessor is ultimately
successful;
2.
the proceedings are contested by the lessee (or an insol-
vency practitioner or bankruptcy trustee on its behalf ),
but are otherwise not contested by any competing
creditor;
3.
where judicial proceedings are instigated by the
mortgagee, it has the cooperation of the owner-lessor,
4.
there is already either an English or New York judgment
or an arbitration award ordering repossession (and that
local counsel should select the answer that represents
the quickest of either litigating afresh on the merits or
enforcing such judgment or award);
5.
the lessee is insolvent at the time the proceedings are
instituted; and
6.
the proceedings may either be for a preliminary (i.e.
interim) or a final order, whichever can be obtained the
quickest in the local jurisdiction.
Legal cost of repossession. We also asked local counsel to
estimate, on the balance of probabilities, the legal costs
of obtaining a court order for repossession of an aircraft,
following commencement of judicial proceedings, given a
choice of four bands: (a) less than or equal to US$50,000, (b)
more than US$50,000 but less than or equal to US$250,000,
(c) more than US$250,000 but less than or equal to
US$1,000,000, or (d) more than US$1,000,000. Greater credit
was given to the less costly bands. We asked local counsel to
make an equivalent set of assumptions as they made when
answering the speed of repossession question. In addition,
we also indicated to local counsel that their estimate
should be inclusive of all court and lawyer fees incurred by
the owner-lessor or mortgagee, but should disregard any
amounts that represent any potential recovery of those costs.
ASU Cape Town Discount or Qualifying OECD Status. Bonus
credit was given if either or both of the following apply: (1)
as of May 30, 2016, the country qualifies for the OECD’s
Aircraft Sector Understanding Cape Town Discount (http://
www.oecd.org/tad/xcred/ctc.htm); and/or (2) as of June 24,
2016 the country is an OECD “high-income” or “zero-rated”
country, with an investment grade sovereign credit rating,
according to Standard & Poor’s (or where a Standard & Poor’s
rating is not available, according to Moody’s, if available).
Factor 2: Insolvency (weighting: 12.5%). This factor
evaluates the friendliness of the jurisdiction’s insolvency
laws from a creditor’s perspective. This factor comprises
the following sub-factors:
Sophistication of insolvency laws. Credit was given where
local counsel was of the opinion that the jurisdiction’s insol-
vency laws were moderately or well developed. We asked
local counsel to restrict their analysis to insolvency law as
it relates to the rights of a mortgagee (as a creditor) and an
owner-lessor (as a creditor/owner) and to take into account
the frequency, volume and history of case law, any pertinent
legal commentary on the subject, and the sophistication of
the applicable statutes.
Insolvency moratorium. We asked local counsel to indicate,
under the mandatorily applicable laws of the local juris-
diction, the period during which a moratorium may be
imposed in the event of a lessee or debtor insolvency /
bankruptcy which adversely aects the rights of the owner-
lessor or mortgagee to repossess an aircraft on termination
of the leasing of the aircraft or enforcement of the mortgage.
A choice of four bands was given: (a) less than or equal to 60
days, (b) more than 60 days but less than or equal to 180 days,
(c) more than 180 days but less than or equal to one year, or
(d) more than one year or variable. We asked local counsel
to assume that the lessee or debtor entity is subject to the
mandatorily applicable insolvency / bankruptcy laws of the
local jurisdiction. In circumstances where, under the law of
the local jurisdiction, more than one answer is applicable
because the moratorium period may vary depending on
other factors (e.g. whether or not the Cape Town Convention
applies or some other criteria are met), local counsel was
asked to select the most favorable (i.e. the shortest) such
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
14
METHODOLOGY AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
time period, and to indicate that the answer applied only to
limited circumstances. Greater credit was given for a shorter
moratorium period, and additional credit was given where
a shorter moratorium period applied in all circumstances,
rather than only in limited circumstances.
Overreaching of the lessee’s insolvency estate. Credit was given
where the mandatorily applicable insolvency laws of the
local jurisdiction did not deem the aircraft to be the lessee’s
property and part of its bankruptcy or insolvency estate
(notwithstanding the owner-lessor’s status as legal owner),
in circumstances where the lessee is put into administration,
liquidation or similar bankruptcy or insolvency process. In
answering this question, we asked local counsel to assume
that the lessee is subject to the mandatorily applicable
insolvency / bankruptcy laws of the local jurisdiction, and
that the lease is a true operating lease (and not a finance or
capital lease).
Factor 3: Deregistration (weighting: 10%). This factor
evaluates the ease with which an owner-lessor or a mortgagee
may deregister an aircraft registered on the country’s aircraft
register. This factor comprises the following sub-factors:
Third party deregistration rights. Credit was given if the
laws of the local jurisdiction and/or the local practice of the
aircraft register or aviation authority will honor a unilateral
request by the owner-lessor or mortgagee to deregister the
aircraft from the aircraft register, without the cooperation
of the lessee. Such a request could be honored either: (a)
pursuant to the exercise of a deregistration power of attorney
or an “irrevocable deregistration and export authorization”
(“IDERA”) pursuant to the Cape Town Convention granted
in favor of the owner-lessor or mortgagee (as applicable), or
(b) pursuant to such person’s status as an owner-lessor or
mortgagee of the aircraft, even without any such power or
IDERA. In answering these questions, we also asked local
counsel to assume that:
1.
the owner-lessor or mortgagee has repossessed the
aircraft, or is seeking simultaneous repossession of the
aircraft;
2.
the leasing has terminated or that the mortgage has
become enforceable, as applicable;
3.
where any such deregistration request is made by an
owner-lessor, it is with the consent of the mortgagee
(if any); and
4.
“cooperation of the lessee” includes a requirement
that the original of the certificate of registration be
surrendered.
Historical precedent of refusing to deregister. In the event that
laws of the local jurisdiction and/or the local practice of the
aircraft register or aviation authority entitle an owner-lessor
or mortgagee to deregister an aircraft, credit was deducted if
local counsel was aware of any instances where the aircraft
register or aviation authority had refused to honor a request
by the owner-lessor and/or the mortgagee (as applicable) to
deregister the aircraft, despite being otherwise entitled to do
so. “Despite being otherwise entitled to do so” means that the
owner-lessor or mortgagee, in submitting the deregistration
request, has complied with the local law and the paperwork
required for deregistration is otherwise in order.
Convenience of deregistration. Credit was given if, with
respect to deregistration of an aircraft, the aircraft register
or aviation authority does not require the application
forms necessary for registration, any necessary consents,
authorizations or supporting documents to be notarized
and/or authenticated before it will accept and process the
deregistration of an aircraft. “Authenticated” includes any
requirement that a document be apostilled, consularized,
legalized or translated.
Factor 4: Export (weighting: 10%). This factor evaluates
the ease with which an owner-lessor or a mortgagee may
export an aircraft habitually based in the country. This factor
comprises the following sub-factors:
Third party export rights. Credit was given if the laws of the
local jurisdiction allow an owner-lessor (with the consent of
the mortgagee, if any) or a mortgagee to unilaterally export
the aircraft from the country without the cooperation of the
lessee (and the owner-lessor, in the case of the mortgagee).
We asked local counsel to assume that:
1.
the owner-lessor or mortgagee has repossessed and
deregistered the aircraft, or is seeking simultaneous
repossession and deregistration of the aircraft;
2.
the leasing has terminated or the mortgage has become
enforceable, as applicable;
3. the owner-lessor or mortgagee has an export power of
attorney granted in its favor; and
4.
the lessee or owner-debtor is insolvent and uncoop-
erative at the time the owner-lessor or mortgagee is
seeking to export the aircraft from the country.
Export licenses and permits. Credit was given if an owner-
lessor or mortgagee may export the aircraft from the country
without requiring an export license or permit. We asked local
counsel to disregard any restrictions relating to the export
of goods to countries subject to sanctions or with respect
to classified or military equipment installed on the aircraft.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
15
METHODOLOGY AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
Export taxes and fees. Credit was given if there are no signif-
icant fees or taxes payable in order for the owner-lessor or
mortgagee to export the aircraft from the country. We left
it to local counsel to determine, using their professional
judgement, whether they thought any such fees were signif-
icant; however, we indicated that “significant” fees or taxes
would include any fees or taxes assessed on a percentage
basis against the value of the aircraft or the sum secured by
a mortgage, etc., but might exclude nominal fees or nominal
taxes amounting to less than US$1,000 or its equivalent in
the local currency of the jurisdiction.
Factor 5: Judgments and Arbitral Awards (weighting:
7.5%). This factor evaluates the ease with which an owner-
lessor or a mortgagee may enforce a judgment or arbitral
award in the jurisdiction without having to re-litigate the
case on its merits. This factor comprises the following
sub-factors:
Enforceability of judgments. Credit was given if the courts
of the jurisdiction will recognize and enforce either: (a)
a judgment rendered by a New York state or U.S. federal
court sitting in New York, or (b) a judgment rendered by
an English court, without the case being re-examined
on its merits. “Enforcement” means the enforcement of
money awards only (and not injunctive or any other type of
non-monetary relief). We also indicated to local counsel that
“without the case being re-examined on its merits” meant
that enforcement would only be subject to the satisfaction
of one or more of the following threshold conditions (and
would not be subject to any other additional conditions):
1.
the court rendering the judgment must have had
jurisdiction over the defendant and has obtained such
jurisdiction in a way that is compatible with the laws of
the local jurisdiction;
2.
the judgment of the rendering court must have been
final and conclusive and not subject to appeal;
3.
the judgment must have been given on the merits of the
case (and, for example, must not have been obtained by
way of “judgment in default”);
4. the judgment must not have been obtained by fraud;
5.
the judgment must not be incompatible with the public
policy of the local jurisdiction;
6.
the judgment must not contradict another judgment
rendered by a court in the local jurisdiction; and/or
7.
in the case of a judgment rendered by an English court, if
the country is a sister EU member state, any of the condi-
tions or exceptions permitted by the “recast” Brussels
Regulation (Council Regulation (EU) 1215/2012).
Additionally, we made clear that a requirement for
reciprocity of recognition/enforcement by a New York or
English court (as applicable) is NOT a permitted threshold
condition, unless it can be said with reasonable certainty
that on a general basis (rather than on a case by case basis)
such reciprocity requirement will be satisfied with respect
to any such New York or English court judgment (because,
for example, a reciprocal enforcement treaty exists).
Enforceability of arbitral awards. Credit was given if the
country has adopted the 1958 Convention on the Recognition
and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York
Convention) and the courts of the the local jurisdiction
recognize and enforce a decision of an arbitrator. We asked
local counsel to assume that a court in the local jurisdiction
would be entitled to refuse enforcement of the arbitral award
based on one of the exceptions and carve-outs enumerated
in the New York Convention.
Factor 6: Preferential Liens (weighting: 7.5%). This factor
evaluates the status of any onerous or unusual non-con-
sensual preferential liens and requisition risks which could
be imposed by the laws of the local jurisdiction and which
may adversely aect an owner-lessor’s or mortgagee’s rights
to the aircraft. “Preferential lien” means a lien that would
take priority over the owner-lessor’s ownership and/or
a mortgagee’s secured creditor rights in the aircraft, and
“non-consensual” means that it arises by operation of law and
not by agreement between a person with rights in the aircraft
and the lien-holder. This factor comprises the following
sub-factors:
Onerous and unusual preferential liens: non-possessory liens.
Credit was given if the laws of the local jurisdiction do not
provide for any non-consensual preferential non-possessory
liens over aircraft that could arise in favor of a repairer /
mechanic or a landlord / hangar-keeper.
Onerous and unusual preferential liens: fleet-wide liens. Credit
was given if the laws of the local jurisdiction do not provide
for any fleet-wide non-consensual preferential liens or
equivalent rights or rights of detention over aircraft that
could arise in favor of third parties not requiring any form of
registration. A “fleet-wide” lien means a lien that has arisen
as a result of unpaid amounts attributable to a particular
aircraft in an operator’s fleet, but has attached or is capable
of attaching to any other aircraft in that operator’s fleet (i.e.
any other aircraft operated by that operator), regardless of
the fact that the owners of such aircraft may be dierent.
Onerous and unusual preferential liens: liens in favor of a lessee
or debtor. Credit was given if the laws of the local jurisdiction
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
16
METHODOLOGY AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS
do not provide for any non-consensual preferential liens or
equivalent rights or rights of detention over aircraft that
could arise in favor of a lessee or debtor (i.e. not a third party)
not requiring any form of registration. An example of such
lien might include a non-consensual preferential lien over
the aircraft arising by operation of law in favor of a lessee
in circumstances where the lessee has a valid counterclaim
against the owner-lessor.
Government requisition and confiscation. Credit was given if
the laws of the local jurisdiction do not allow the government
to requisition or confiscate an aircraft without needing to pay
the owner reasonable compensation. We asked local counsel
to disregard government requisition or confiscation of the
aircraft in circumstances where there has been a violation of
any drug-tracking laws or other criminal oenses.
Factor 7: Political Stability (weighting: 30%). This factor
evaluates, predominantly, the adherence by the jurisdiction
to the rule of law, by reference to a number of rule of law
indices and other approximate measures, and should be
helpful in determining the ease with which the theoretical
legal rights available to an owner-lessor or mortgagee may
be enforced in practice. This factor comprises the following
sub-factors:
OECD Membership. Credit was given if the country is an
OECD “high-income” or “zero-rated” country according to
the OECD’s “country risk” classification system (see further,
http://www.oecd.org/tad/xcred/crc.htm).
Sovereign credit rating. Credit was given to countries with
an investment grade sovereign credit rating, according to
Standard & Poor’s (or where a Standard & Poor’s rating is
not available, according to Moody’s, if available).
World Justice Project – Rule of Law Index (2016). Greater credit
was given to countries with higher scores on the following
measures: “Absence of Corruption”, “Open Government”,
“Regulatory Enforcement” and “Civil Justice” (see further,
http://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index).
Heritage Foundation – Index of Economic Freedom (2016).
Greater credit was given to countries with higher scores on
the following measures: “Property rights” and “Freedom
from corruption” (see further, http://www.heritage.org/
index/).
World Economic Forum – Global Competitiveness Report
2015-2016. Greater credit was given to countries with
higher scores on the following measures: “Property rights”,
“Irregular payments and bribes”, “Judicial independence”,
“Favoritism in decisions of government ocials”, “Eciency
of legal framework in settling disputes”, “Eciency of legal
framework in challenging regulations” and “Transparency
of government policymaking” (see further, http://reports.
weforum.org/global-competitiveness-report-2015-2016/).
In the event that there is no data on the country in either
one or two of the rule of law indices, each such index is
ignored for scoring purposes without any negative eect
on that country’s aggregate score for this factor. In the rare
event that there is no data on the country in all three of the
indices, then the Political Stability factor is ignored in its
entirety and a note is made on the one-page summary for
that country (and in the Summary of Scores table on pages
17 and 18) indicating that no such data is available.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
17
Summary of Scores
Summarized in the table below are the overall scores for each country included in this
publication, together with a breakdown of the scores for each factor. The table has been
sorted in descending order of overall score, with the highest scoring country at the top and
the lowest scoring country at the bottom.
Weighting: (22.5%) (12.5%) (10.0%) (10%) (7.5%) (7.5%) (30.0%)
Country Repo. Insolvency Dereg. Export Judg. / Arb. Pref. Liens Pol. Stab. TOTAL
Aruba 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% No Data 100.0%
Australia 100.0% 90.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 99.2% 96.6%
Canada 96.4% 90.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 100.0% 96.1%
United States 96.4% 90.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 93.7% 96.0%
Netherlands 82.1% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 96.0%
New Zealand 100.0% 90.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 94.4% 95.2%
Denmark 92.9% 90.0% 80.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 99.2% 93.0%
Bermuda 95.0% 60.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% No Data 91.3%
Cayman Islands 95.0% 90.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% No Data 91.3%
United Kingdom 89.3% 60.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 94.4% 89.0%
Germany 71.4% 100.0% 60.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 87.1%
Guernsey 90.0% 90.0% 80.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% No Data 86.8%
Ireland 85.7% 80.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 85.7% 86.3%
Finland 78.6% 90.0% 60.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% 94.4% 85.8%
Jersey 95.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% No Data 85.7%
Austria 71.4% 80.0% 100.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 93.7% 84.2%
Norway 85.7% 80.0% 40.0% 75.0% 100.0% 25.0% 100.0% 80.2%
France 85.7% 60.0% 20.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% 93.7% 79.4%
Switzerland 71.4% 80.0% 20.0% 75.0% 100.0% 75.0% 100.0% 78.7%
Czech Republic 82.1% 90.0% 40.0% 75.0% 100.0% 50.0% 82.9% 77.4%
Hong Kong 67.9% 60.0% 100.0% 100.0% 33.3% 50.0% 88.9% 75.7%
Taiwan (Republic of China) 71.4% 80.0% 0.0% 100.0% 66.7% 100.0% 89.8% 75.5%
Portugal 53.6% 90.0% 80.0% 75.0% 100.0% 75.0% 69.8% 72.9%
Estonia 67.9% 60.0% 60.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 93.7% 71.9%
French Polynesia 80.0% 60.0% 20.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% No Data 71.4%
New Caledonia 80.0% 60.0% 20.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% No Data 71.4%
Costa Rica 57.1% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 56.3% 70.3%
Israel 57.1% 70.0% 40.0% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 81.6% 70.1%
Japan 42.8% 60.0% 20.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% 94.0% 69.9%
Lithuania 75.0% 60.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 74.0% 69.7%
Belgium 67.9% 70.0% 20.0% 50.0% 100.0% 25.0% 94.4% 68.7%
Poland 50.0% 60.0% 40.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.4% 67.9%
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
18
SUMMARY OF SCORES
Weighting: (22.5%) (12.5%) (10.0%) (10%) (7.5%) (7.5%) (30.0%)
Country Repo. Insolvency Dereg. Export Judg. / Arb. Pref. Liens Pol. Stab. TOTAL
Korea 57.1% 60.0% 0.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% 82.9% 67.7%
Italy 75.0% 90.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 54.4% 67.6%
Hungary 75.0% 70.0% 40.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 54.0% 67.1%
Slovenia 67.9% 60.0% 0.0% 75.0% 100.0% 75.0% 75.0% 65.9%
South Africa 50.0% 100.0% 80.0% 25.0% 100.0% 100.0% 55.2% 65.8%
Mauritius 46.4% 60.0% 100.0% 50.0% 100.0% 75.0% 64.8% 65.5%
Kenya 67.9% 90.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 75.0% 18.5% 65.2%
Turkey 75.0% 90.0% 80.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 24.6% 64.8%
China 57.1% 90.0% 100.0% 75.0% 33.3% 50.0% 44.4% 61.2%
Macau 32.1% 80.0% 40.0% 75.0% 100.0% 100.0% 55.0% 60.2%
Nigeria 75.0% 90.0% 100.0% 75.0% 100.0% 50.0% 9.7% 59.8%
Rwanda 67.9% 60.0% 20.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 32.1% 59.4%
Latvia 75.0% 20.0% 0.0% 50.0% 100.0% 75.0% 68.4% 58.0%
Indonesia 71.4% 80.0% 80.0% 75.0% 33.3% 50.0% 27.2% 56.0%
Pakistan 67.9% 20.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 8.5% 55.3%
Mozambique 46.4% 90.0% 80.0% 75.0% 100.0% 75.0% 7.1% 52.5%
Oman 57.1% 20.0% 80.0% 75.0% 33.3% 75.0% 40.8% 51.2%
United Arab Emirates 21.4% 20.0% 80.0% 50.0% 33.3% 75.0% 75.0% 50.9%
Namibia 46.4% 90.0% 0.0% 75.0% 66.7% 75.0% 35.2% 50.4%
Brazil 32.1% 100.0% 80.0% 25.0% 100.0% 50.0% 26.4% 49.4%
Papua New Guinea 57.1% 90.0% 80.0% 75.0% 66.7% 50.0% 0.0% 48.4%
Sri Lanka 57.1% 40.0% 80.0% 25.0% 100.0% 50.0% 27.8% 47.9%
Malaysia 64.3% 20.0% 0.0% 100.0% 33.3% 0.0% 61.1% 47.8%
India 53.6% 60.0% 40.0% 25.0% 100.0% 25.0% 41.1% 47.8%
Mexico 50.0% 90.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 30.2% 46.5%
Fiji 78.6% 50.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 50.0% 0.0% 45.2%
Vietnam 57.1% 50.0% 80.0% 50.0% 33.3% 75.0% 15.9% 45.0%
Ukraine 71.4% 50.0% 40.0% 25.0% 100.0% 50.0% 9.5% 42.9%
Romania 39.3% 60.0% 0.0% 25.0% 100.0% 50.0% 38.9% 41.8%
El Salvador 50.0% 20.0% 40.0% 75.0% 100.0% 50.0% 16.3% 41.4%
Azerbaijan 60.7% 20.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0% 25.0% 18.4% 41.0%
Peru 35.7% 60.0% 20.0% 25.0% 100.0% 75.0% 22.4% 39.9%
Jordan 21.4% 50.0% 80.0% 0.0% 33.3% 25.0% 52.0% 39.0%
Russia 21.4% 100.0% 20.0% 25.0% 33.3% 100.0% 15.5% 36.5%
Myanmar 42.9% 0.0% 100.0% 50.0% 33.3% 75.0% 7.4% 35.0%
Dominican Republic 21.4% 20.0% 40.0% 75.0% 100.0% 50.0% 14.9% 34.5%
Bulgaria 7.1% 20.0% 20.0% 75.0% 100.0% 75.0% 22.2% 33.4%
Guatemala 21.4% 50.0% 0.0% 75.0% 100.0% 50.0% 10.9% 33.1%
Lebanon 21.4% 20.0% 0.0% 25.0% 100.0% 100.0% 8.9% 27.5%
Egypt 7.1% 0.0% 80.0% 50.0% 33.3% 25.0% 15.7% 23.7%
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
19
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Aruba (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Aruba
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Gomez & Bikker
CONTACT:
LINCOLN D. GOMEZ, Managing Partner, lincoln@gobiklaw.com
B. PATRICK HONNEBIER, Of Counsel, b.honnebier@gobiklaw.com
Overall Score Category
100%
LOWER
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
100%
12.5%
Insolvency
100%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB+
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
20
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Australia (*)
Jurisdiction(s): C’th of Australia, New South Wales & Others
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
King & Wood Mallesons
CONTACT:
JOHN CANNING, Partner, john.[email protected]
TEJASWI NIMMAGADDA, Counsel,
Overall Score Category
97%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
100%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
99%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
New Zealand
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
United States
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
97%
LOWER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
97%
LOWER
YES
NO
NO
YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
21
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Austria
Jurisdiction(s): Austrian Federal Law, European Law
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
BINDER GRÖSSWANG
Rechtsanwälte GmbH
CONTACT:
EMANUEL WELTEN, Partner, welten@bindergroesswang.at
ROBERT WIPPEL, Attorney, wippel@bindergroesswang.at
Overall Score Category
84%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
71%
12.5%
Insolvency
80%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA+
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
NO NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
22
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Azerbaijan
Jurisdiction(s): Republic of Azerbaijan
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
BM Morrison Partners LLC
CONTACT:
DELARA ISRAFILOVA, Partner, disrafilova@bmlawaz.com
LEYLA SAFAROVA, Associate, lsafarova@bmlawaz.com
Overall Score Category
41%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
61%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
25%
30.0%
Political Stability
18%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB+
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
Bermuda
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
51%
MOD.
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
23
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Belgium (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Belgian Civil Law
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
LVP Law
CONTACT:
MIA WOUTERS, Prof / Of Counsel, mia.wouters@lvplaw.be
Overall Score Category
69%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
68%
12.5%
Insolvency
70%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
25%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
NO NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
24
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Bermuda (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Bermuda
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Conyers Dill & Pearman Limited
CONTACT:
JULIE MCLEAN, Director/ Head of Aviation Finance,
julie.mclean@conyersdill.com
JASON PINEY, Director, [email protected]
Overall Score Category
91%
LOWER
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
95%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A+
N/A
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
25
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Brazil (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Brazil (Federal laws)
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Felsberg Advogados
CONTACT:
JOÃO PAULO SERVERA, Partner, jpservera@felsberg.com.br
MARIA DA GRAÇA PEDRETTI, Partner, gracapedretti@felsberg.com.br
Overall Score Category
49%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
32%
12.5%
Insolvency
100%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
26%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
26
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Bulgaria (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Bulgaria
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Boyanov & Co.
CONTACT:
RAINA DIMITROVA, Partner, r.dimitrova@boyanov.com
BORISLAV BOYANOV, Managing Partner, b.boyanov@boyanov.com
Overall Score Category
33%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
7%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
22%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB+
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
27
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Canada (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Canada (Federal laws); Province of Ontario & others
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP
CONTACT:
DONALD G. GRAY, Partner/Head of Aircraft Finance,
donald.gray@blakes.com
JASON MACINTYRE, Partner/Aviation and Aerospace Group,
jason.macintyre@blakes.com
Overall Score Category
96%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
96%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
100%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
28
ARTICLE
Catch Me If You Can: Prelude To An Aircraft Repo
by Paul P. Jebely
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman (HK) LLP
Introduction
Aviation leasing is a study in the notion that where there is
reward, there is risk (which is to say that, sometimes, return
on capital becomes more about return of capital). Yet, in an
environment where there appears in certain circles to be
a barely finite amount of investor confidence (especially
among newer investors, and especially in the Far East), it
seems that some market participants may occasionally lose
sight of the fact that aviation is a risky enterprise. Good
lease deals can go bad, and bad lease deals—if, for whatever
unfortunate reason, they were done in the first instance—can
get far worse.
The worst case scenario of having to “get the plane back”
from an uncooperative airline requires adequate consider-
ation, before it is time to get the plane back. Repossession
risk in any given lease deal should be a known-known rather
than a known-unknown. That said, the actual act of getting
the plane back—what is generally considered legal “repos-
session”—is often the anticlimax that follows the physical
detention of the aircraft. It is beyond simple semantics, and
not widely appreciated outside of a relatively small circle
of in-house and external counsel. Little guidance exists on
the very critical step of actually getting the plane, before
getting the plane back, by those who have “been there and
done that” many times, and look forward to doing it many
times again. In that light, the following are some insights
that could otherwise only be gained after a great deal of
experience actually repossessing aircraft on behalf of lessors
(and lenders) worldwide. The following is not exhaustive
(and has not been exhausting to write), and is intended for
mature audiences.
Prelude to a Prelude to a Repo
There are, of course, many intervening steps between an
initial default and a termination of a lease. While not the
focus here, experience shows that there are always early
warning signs that an airline is in trouble that are overlooked
in hindsight. Among these are delayed payments and/or
requests to reschedule payments, covenant breaches and/
or requests for waiver, failure to undertake required mainte-
nance, failure to maintain insurances, market “chatter,”
adverse press articles, fall in share price (if publicly traded),
restatement of accounts, failure to provide accounts, new
limitations on operating licenses, and so on. In military
parlance, it is important for a lessor to stay frosty.
When financial distress does become evident, it is best to
start by evaluating the need or possibility of a restructuring
or workout, while also beginning to formulate the repos-
session strategy—or, the proverbial nuclear option: the
insolvency strategy. Restructures and workouts are preferred,
if the life of the deal is to continue, since they are discreet
(reducing risks from other creditors and loss of passenger
business), maintain income from aircraft, avoid the need
for distressed sale of the aircraft and usually do not involve
third party interlopers like pensions regulators, suppliers,
unions, et cetera.
It is important to assemble a team consisting of commercial,
legal and technical players to analyze the situation at the
outset when trouble first arises. If there is a willingness to
consider engaging in a restructure or workout such that
the life of the deal continues, key considerations are (i) the
lessor’s relationship with and total exposure to the airline
and (ii) the airline’s prospects for recovery (which should
include an objective competitive analysis of its routes,
operating costs, equipment, management strength, franchise
value, and market/industry position).
At this juncture, a good question to ask is: do we even want
the aircraft back? “Get the plane back” is a practically innate
reaction, and this question is therefore often-overlooked.
This is especially true with older generation aircraft where
the cost of repossession negates the benefits in favor of a
restructure/workout—or, if the life of the deal is to end early,
debt recovery by means other than aircraft repossession. The
aircraft value, condition, carrying costs and remarketability
are the key considerations in this respect at each stage.
The Best Repossession Is No Repossession
Aircraft repossession is, at best, an unpleasant and disruptive
aair. If the life of the deal is to come to an end, then a
“friendly return” of the aircraft, ideally in expected return
condition, should always be the next option that the parties
work toward as part of what amounts to mitigation and a
negotiated settlement of the lessor’s losses. Often, however,
it is necessary for a lessor to employ the Rooseveltian edict
of “speak softly and carry a big stick”—which embodies the
principles of coercive diplomacy—to promote friendliness
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
29
ARTICLE: CATCH ME IF YOU CAN: PRELUDE TO AN AIRCRAFT REPO
in this context. Use the “carrot and the stick” approach by
oering a combination of enticement and threat of harm to
try and induce the desired “friendly return” behavior. This
idiom (a reference to a cart driver dangling a carrot in front
of a mule while holding a stick behind the mule) is used in
diplomacy to describe the realist concept of “hard power.” It
is worth highlighting that it is both carrot and stick (and not
carrot or stick) that are to be used. The threat of disruptive,
costly (and public) court action itself is likely the most
common stick that can be used (and the avoidance thereof
can be considered a carrot). In this light, keep in mind that
discretion is to be earned by a defaulting party, not assumed.
“Worst Case Scenario” Strategy
As soon as it becomes evident that a friendly return is
unlikely to be achieved, lessors need to be as strong and
aggressive as possible going forward. Once the final decision
to repossess has been taken, the time for further indulgences
has passed. Map out a final repossession strategy rooted in
a clear understanding of commercially rational and legally
sound objectives. Do not take or make it personal. The
decision to repossess an aircraft and how to do so should be
a rational decision, whereby passion and chance are subor-
dinate to commercial and legal reason. Apply the principle of
“real options analysis,” and avoid what is known as “negative
target fixation.” Successful aircraft repossession requires
intelligent strategy and decisive leadership, foremost by lead
(internal or external) counsel. Aircraft repossession is a legal
task necessitated by commercial failure. It could be argued
that the technical aspects are of near-tantamount impor-
tance, but this point will be not argued here. In any case, be
aware that aircraft repossession can be an all-consuming
aair for those involved in the day-to-day handling of the
legal, technical and commercial issues that will arise. The
decision maker(s) with responsibility for the repossession
must be empowered to make quick decisions.
If all else fails—and assuming that the lessor (or lender)
actually wants the aircraft back then, by all means, repossess,
but focus first on securing physical possession of the aircraft
somewhere “nice”—which, as discussed further below, is not
just a reference to the jurisdiction’s weather.
Fresh Eyes
It is useful at the outset of an aircraft repossession to (re-)
analyze the underlying deal documents with fresh eyes (i.e.:
with external counsel) and ask the basic questions such as
to (i) ascertain what (if any) debt recovery alternatives to
repossession may still be available, (ii) confirm when repos-
session can take place, and (iii) perform a “sanity check” to
ensure that there are no relevant defects in the original deal
documents that could frustrate the repossession.
Local Lawyers
Select the right local counsel because having an adept and
experienced local counsel is critical to the success of your
repossession eorts. That noted, do not expect any counsel
to work miracles. Request an early honest assessment and
encourage frankness, because it is critical that expecta-
tions be managed and realistic objectives and timelines be
formulated.
Do not select counsel based solely on their skills as an
apparent fortune-teller, and bear in mind that “tell us what
we want hear” is not a productive instruction to local counsel.
The most important considerations in appointing the right
local counsel are (i) the firm’s and lead lawyer’s experience
in the substantive and procedural law relevant to aircraft
repossession, (ii) domestic aviation industry experience/
familiarity, and (iii) their fees. The order of importance is
as presented.
Lien In
Be aware that there are likely to be other creditors, including
super-priority creditors that may be able to assert statutory
or possessory liens and/or exercise detention rights over
the aircraft. These creditors can present very significant and
firm hurdles to eective repossession. Most often, it is best
that these creditors, including the airport authority, are paid
(rather than fought in the local court) in order to facilitate
the repossession, de-registration and re-positioning of the
aircraft. In this sense, it is a good idea to hope for the best,
but expect the worst. This is especially true when it comes
to issues with aviation and airport authorities (which can
be a repossessing lessor’s best friend or worst enemy in this
context, but seldom in between).
Location, Location, Location
To state the obvious: aircraft are designed to cross borders,
and almost all (jet) engines are designed to be swapped.
In that light, it is critical to determine a friendly venue
or venues for repossession, which may not be the state of
aircraft registration. Flight schedule visibility is necessary
to ascertain when the subject aircraft (and/or engines) may
be located in a jurisdiction that is amenable to taking interim
subject matter jurisdiction and granting injunctive relief in
favor of the repossessing party.
One tried and tested method of persuading courts in
common law jurisdictions, for example, is to claim that the
tort of conversion is being perpetrated in the jurisdiction
in question by virtue of the fact that the aircraft and/or
engines are located in such jurisdiction in the possession
of the airline despite the fact that the airline’s bailment of
the aircraft and engines was terminated following an event
of default.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
30
ARTICLE: CATCH ME IF YOU CAN: PRELUDE TO AN AIRCRAFT REPO
While on the topic of location, the location and status of
the aircraft records are of almost tantamount importance.
From a logistical perspective, it is critical to have flight
schedule visibility and awareness of records location so that
arrangements (such as facility and ramp access, and access
for contract flight crew) can be made wherever required in
advance, including ensuring that ground handling, insurance
and storage arrangements are in place.
Ground and Pound
The ultimate key to any successful aircraft repossession is
usually, first and foremost, physical control of the aircraft in
a creditor-friendly jurisdiction. Self-help may not always be
available—and even where it is technically available pursuant
to local law, it may not be desirable—and so repossession
via court action, or multiple court actions in different
jurisdictions, may be required. Typically this takes the
form of applications for interim injunctive relief. In most
cases, the repossession—or, rather, detention—of an aircraft
will not immediately secure full possession such that, for
example, the lessor can deregister and fly the aircraft away
at its will. Regardless, it is almost always in the lessor’s best
interest to gain physical (although limited) control of the
aircraft without delay. Simple physical control can often
be acquired more quickly and therefore less expensively
through self-help, freezing/mareva, replevin writ (or other
injunctive order) than full possession. A replevin writ
enables an interim injunction that orders the airline to
return the aircraft to the possession and control of the lessor,
pending final judgment or settlement, whereas a freezing
order (formerly called a mareva injunction) is an interim
injunction that restrains an airline from dealing with the
aircraft in order to preserve the aircraft until a final judgment
can be enforced.
The lessor will often gain significant leverage in negotiation
after securing the detention of the aircraft, even though it
has not yet secured actual repossession. Typically at this
stage, a defaulting and formerly unfriendly airline becomes
highly incentivized to engage in damage control since its
strategy to stall the process while continuing to operate the
aircraft will have failed. Most often, physical control in this
manner yields “friendly return” behavior after the fact, and
signals the conclusion of the aircraft repossession—though
ongoing debt recovery may continue.
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
31
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Cayman Islands (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Cayman Islands
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Walkers, Cayman Islands oce
CONTACT:
RICHARD MUNDEN, Partner, richard.munden@walkersglobal.com
NICK DUNNE, Senior Counsel, nick.dunne@walkersglobal.com
Overall Score Category
91%
LOWER
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
95%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (Moody’s):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
N/A
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
32
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
China (*)
Jurisdiction(s): People’s Republic of China
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
King & Wood Mallesons
CONTACT:
MA FENG, Partner, [email protected]
WANG NING, Partner, [email protected]
Overall Score Category
61%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
57%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
44%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA-
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
33
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Costa Rica (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Costa Rica
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Aguilar Castillo Love
CONTACT:
MARCO SOLANO, Partner, msg@aguilarcastillolove.com
JOHN AGUILAR JR., Partner, jaq@aguilarcastillolove.com
Overall Score Category
70%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
57%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
56%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB-
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
34
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Czech Republic (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Czech Republic
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Kocian Solc Balastik,
advokatni kancelar, s.r.o.
CONTACT:
JIŘÍ HORNÍK, Partner, jhornik@ksb.cz
PETR KOBLOVSKÝ, Lawyer, pkoblovsky@ksb.cz
Overall Score Category
77%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
82%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
83%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA-
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
35
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Denmark (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Denmark
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Gorrissen Federspiel
CONTACT:
MORTEN L. JAKOBSEN, Partner, [email protected]
KATRINE STELLINI, Assistant Attorney, [email protected]
Overall Score Category
93%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
93%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
99%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
36
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Dominican Republic (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Dominican Republic
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Russin Vecchi & Herbdia Bonetti
CONTACT:
MARIA ESTHER FERNANDEZ A. DE POU, Partner,
mefernandez@rvhb.com
Overall Score Category
35%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
21%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
15%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
United States
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
41%
HIGHER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
37
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Egypt
Jurisdiction(s): Egyptian Law
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
AL Kamel Law Firm
CONTACT:
DR. MOHAMMED KAMEL, Managing Partner, dr.kamel@kamelaw.com
Overall Score Category
24%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
7%
12.5%
Insolvency
0%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
25%
30.0%
Political Stability
16%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B-
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
Germany
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
United Kingdom
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
22%
HIGHER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
26%
HIGHER
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
38
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
El Salvador (*)
Jurisdiction(s): El Salvador
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Arias & Muñoz
CONTACT:
ANA MERCEDES LÓPEZ, Partner, AnaMercedes.Lopez@ariaslaw.com
CAROLINA LAZO, Associate, Carolina.Lazo@ariaslaw.com
Overall Score Category
41%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
50%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
16%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B+
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
39
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Estonia (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Estonia, European Law
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Raidla Ellex
CONTACT:
TOOMAS VAHER, Partner, toomas.vaher@ellex.ee
ARNE OTS, Partner, arne.ots@ellex.ee
Overall Score Category
72%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
68%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
60%
10.0%
Export
0%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++0
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA-
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
40
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Fiji (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Fiji
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Munro Leys
CONTACT:
RICHARD NAIDU, Partner, richard.naidu@munroleyslaw.com.
EMILY KING, Associate, emily.king@munroleyslaw.com.
Overall Score Category
45%
HIGHER
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
79%
12.5%
Insolvency
50%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B+
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
41
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Finland (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Finland
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Borenius Attorneys Ltd
CONTACT:
ULLA VON WEISSENBERG, Partner, ulla.weissenberg@borenius.com
ROBERT PELDÁN, Counsel, robert.peldan@borenius.com
Overall Score Category
86%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
79%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
60%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA+
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
42
ARTICLE
Mortgagee Duties: PK Airfinance
Sarl v Alpstream AG
by Sarah Humpleby
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
Introduction
In December 2015, the Court of Appeal rearmed the scope
of a mortgagee’s duties and to whom such duties are owed. In
this briefing we examine the key messages from the decision
and the practical implications for the aviation industry.
Brief facts
PK Airfinance Sarl (“PK”) financed seven A320 aircraft (the
“Aircraft”) for Alpstream Aviation Limited and Betastream
Ltd (the “Borrowers”). The Aircraft were leased to Blue
Wings and the Borrowers granted mortgages over the
Aircraft to PK. PK made further loans to Caelus Aviation
for an additional three aircraft which were leased to Olympic
Airlines (the “Caelus Aircraft”). The mortgages granted over
the Caelus Aircraft in favour of PK were cross-collateralised
and also secured the amounts owed in respect of the Aircraft.
Alpstream’s aliate, Alphastream, had an equity interest in
the Caelus Aircraft.
The Borrowers defaulted on the loans in respect of the
Aircraft and in March 2010 PK chose to enforce its security.
PK repossessed the Aircraft and arranged remedial works
to restore them to full life condition then scheduled an
auction for the Aircraft to be sold. At the public auction, PK
was the only bidder—no third party attended and, although
Alpstream did attend, it declined to bid.
Alpstream claimed that PK had breached its duty as
mortgagee to obtain the best price for the Aircraft. As a result,
Alpstream argued that the equity position of Alphastream
was eroded and it would receive less than it deserved from
the transaction because there were insucient sale proceeds
to flow through the payment waterfall agreed between the
parties.
At first instance the High Court upheld Alpstream’s claims
and awarded damages representing the dierence between
the price PK paid for the Aircraft and the price determined
by the judge to be the best reasonably obtainable (with
reference to an independent valuation).
Court of Appeal decision
(1) No Duty to Unsecured Creditors—the Court of Appeal held
that the judge at first instance had overextended the law. A
mortgagee owes a duty to the mortgagor and those with an
interest in the ‘equity of redemption’ (including subsequent
mortgagees, co-mortgagors and guarantors of the relevant
debt) but not to anyone else.
The equitable duties owed by a mortgagee can be modified by
agreement and the Court of Appeal wished to give eect to
the contractual agreements made between the parties with
the benefit of advice from experienced law firms. In this
case, the parties had explicitly agreed that Alphastream’s
equity interest was fully subordinated in all respects. Such
arrangements were undermined by the High Court’s
decision that Alphastream could be paid damages before
the loans in respect of the Aircraft and the Caelus Aircraft
had been repaid in full.
PK owed no duty to Alphastream, who had nothing more
than a contractual right to receive surplus proceeds should
they exist. Even if PK had owed such a duty, there had been
no sale of the Caelus Aircraft and so Alphastream could not
demonstrate that it had suered any economic loss.
(2) Sale to Self—the Court of Appeal noted that it is common
practice in the aviation industry for a secured creditor to bid
at auction to protect the value of its security. In any event,
the sale was not a sale by the mortgagee to itself since the
Borrowers had (at PK’s direction) transferred title to the
Aircraft to Wells Fargo as owner trustee prior to the auction.
The Court of Appeal found no good reason to expand the
self-dealing rule. However, where a connected party sale
potentially gives rise to a conflict of interest and duty, the
burden of proof is reversed and the mortgagee must show
it has discharged its duties.
(3) Best Price—in a connected party sale, the mortgagee must
show that it obtained the best price reasonably obtainable.
Obtaining an independent valuation is one method for a
mortgagee to discharge this duty, but it is not the only
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
43
ARTICLE: MORTGAGEE DUTIES: PK AIRFINANCE SARL V ALPSTREAM AG
method. The valuation relied upon by the claimants did
not allow for any discount in a forced sale scenario, ignored
the fact that a mortgagee is at liberty to choose the timing
and method of realising the value of its security and was
predicated on there being a remarketing period. PK had
in fact paid more for the Aircraft than anyone else would
have been willing to pay in the circumstances. The Court
of Appeal confirmed that mortgagees buying mortgaged
property are not obliged to pay more than the market price
at the time and in this instance, PK had provided sucient
evidence that it had discharged its duties.
Practical Implications and Looking to the Future
Records: Repossession and enforcement of security is often
a last resort for lenders and the process requires patience
and deep pockets. The clarifications provided by the Court of
Appeal helpfully reduce the scope for potential disputes with
third parties and unsecured creditors in an already dicult
situation. However Lenders enforcing security would be
well advised to maintain clear records of what has been done
and why, particularly on any connected party sale so that the
reverse burden of proof can be met.
Valuations: Following the first instance decision, language
began to emerge in financing documentation addressing
when secured parties would be expected to obtain an
independent valuation and acknowledging that a sale
following enforcement would likely result in a distress
value being paid for the asset(s). It is important to note that
independent valuations are opinions rather than fact and
there can be a wide variance between valuations obtained
from appraisers in the market. Although such a valuation can
be helpful, it is not always the best evidence and the Court
of Appeal judgment made it clear that there is no absolute
requirement to obtain an independent valuation in order
for a mortgagee to discharge its duties. Going forward there
should be no need to suggest otherwise in documentation.
Market Conditions: The Court of Appeal judgment also
noted that “the circumstances of a sale influence the price
obtainable.” By inference, the prevailing market conditions
should be considered at the time of any such sale but the
Court of Appeal did not discuss in detail the impact of such
market conditions on the mortgagee’s duty to obtain the
best price. At the time of the sale of the Aircraft in 2010,
the Aircraft were relatively new and the A320neo had not
yet been announced. If the same sale arose today, things
might be very dierent: the market is in transition across four
major Airbus and Boeing product types in favour of more
ecient aircraft and there is uncertainty in the financial
markets. Ultimately, the value of an asset at any given time
will be determined by the price a buyer is willing to pay.
Conclusion
The aviation industry is currently in relatively good health:
airlines are benefiting from low oil prices, liquidity is readily
available and consumer confidence is high. However, many
consider that we are at the peak of the cycle and the inevi-
table downturn is just over the horizon. Mortgagees finding
that they must repossess can at least take comfort that they
are free to conduct sales on enforcement as they see fit and
owe equitable duties only to those with a direct and regis-
trable interest in the aircraft. When it comes to determining
the best price obtainable, any clarification the courts can
give that the prevailing market conditions at the time of
sale should be taken into account would be well received.
Originally published in Euromoney’s Expert Guides LMG
Rising Stars June 2016.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
44
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
France (*)
Jurisdiction(s): France
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Hena d’Estrees
CONTACT:
YVES HENAFF D’ESTREES, Avocat/Attorney-at-law,
yhena@lexfrance.com
Overall Score Category
79%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
86%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
45
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
French Polynesia (*)
Jurisdiction(s): French Territories
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Hena d’Estrees
CONTACT:
YVES HENAFF D’ESTREES, Avocat/Attorney-at-law,
yhena@lexfrance.com
Overall Score Category
71%
MODERATE
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
80%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB-
N/A
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
46
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Germany (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Germany (Federal laws)
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Ehlers, Ehlers & Partner
CONTACT:
P. NIKOLAI EHLERS, Partner, n.ehlers@eep-law.de
Overall Score Category
87%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
71%
12.5%
Insolvency
100%
10.0%
Deregistration
60%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
100%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
47
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Guatemala
Jurisdiction(s): Guatemala
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Aguilar Castillo Love, S.A.
CONTACT:
JUAN CARLOS CASTILLO, Partner, jcc@aguilarcastillolove.com
NATALIA CALLEJAS, Associate, nca@aguilarcastillolove.com
Overall Score Category
33%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
21%
12.5%
Insolvency
50%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
11%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
United States
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
Mexico
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
43%
HIGHER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
33%
HIGHER
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
48
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Guernsey (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Guernsey
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Mourant Ozannes
CONTACT:
JOHN ROCHESTER, Partner, john.rochester@mourantozannes.com
ALANA GILLIES, Senior Associate, alana.gillies@mourantozannes.com
Overall Score Category
87%
LOWER
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
90%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA-
N/A
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
49
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Hong Kong (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Hong Kong, a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw
Pittman (HK) LLP
CONTACT:
PAUL P. JEBELY, Managing Partner, paul.jebely@pillsburylaw.com
Overall Score Category
76%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
68%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
89%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
50
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Hungary
Jurisdiction(s): Hungary
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Lakatos, Köves and Partners
CONTACT:
SZABOLCS MESTYÁN, Partner, szabolcs.mestyan@lakatoskoves.hu
Overall Score Category
67%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
75%
12.5%
Insolvency
70%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
54%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB-
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
Poland
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
Austria
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
67%
MOD.
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
73%
MOD.
NO
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
51
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
India
Jurisdiction(s): India
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
RNClegal
CONTACT:
RAVI NATH, Managing Partner, ra[email protected]
AJAY KUMAR, Partner, ajay[email protected]
Overall Score Category
48%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
54%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
25%
30.0%
Political Stability
41%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB-
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
52
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Indonesia (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Indonesia
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Roosdiono & Partners
CONTACT:
AFRIYAN RACHMAD, Partner, afriyan.rachmad@zicolaw.com
BRAMANTYO A. PRATAMA, Senior Associate,
bramantyo.pratama@zicolaw.com
Overall Score Category
56%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
71%
12.5%
Insolvency
80%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
27%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB+
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
NO N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
53
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Ireland
Jurisdiction(s): Ireland
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Walkers
CONTACT:
KEN RUSH, Partner, ken.rush@walkersglobal.com
Overall Score Category
86%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
86%
12.5%
Insolvency
80%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
86%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A+
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
NO NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
54
ARTICLE
Aviation Finance Unchained: The Potential
Application of Blockchain Technology
co-authored by Paul Jebely & Mark Lessard
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
Blockchain technology, also called distributed ledger
technology (DLT), is best known for its use in the crypto-
currency known as Bitcoin. This revolutionary technology
has garnered great interest in the financial sector, mobilizing
public and private sector players seeking to reduce or
eliminate entire categories of transaction costs and create
deeper, more liquid capital markets.
Given the amount of aircraft trading and financing activity in
the market, and the concomitant novation fatigue aicting
many airlines, the time is ripe for a thought experiment on
the potential application of this disruptive technology to
aircraft finance.
New Technology
A blockchain is a ledger of transactions between parties on
a network. The dierence between a blockchain and a tradi-
tional database, such as DTC or the international registry,
is that the ledger is distributed. That is, each party on the
network maintains a complete copy of the ledger. The parties
all participate collectively in the validation and recordation
of transactions via a consensus protocol. There is no single
arbiter of truth (no exchange, no bank, no custodian) clearing
and settling those transactions. Thus, a blockchain ledger
can eciently record transactions without costs and delays
caused by intermediaries.
Bitcoin was the first application of blockchain technology,
but blockchains can be used to clear, settle, validate and
record transactions in any asset that can be digitized. T+3
settlement delays need no longer exist. Capital tables,
including asset-specific attributes, such as tranching or
tax attributes that might vary from one transaction to the
next, would be managed algorithmically from agreement
to execution to performance, without the opportunity for
human error. As such, some economists predict that the
liquidity and value of securities issued on legacy systems will
be lower in comparison with securities issued on blockchain
based systems. DLT also makes possible the use of so-called
smart contracts – ie, contracts embedded in computer
code that can implement themselves automatically on the
occurrence of discrete events. Examples of smart contracts
include algorithms automating rent payments in leases that
may have derived from external inputs and coupon payments
based on the calendar day, as well as security instruments
attaching to specific property.
It all sounds far-fetched, but proof-of-concept testing is
underway in various sectors, including financial services,
insurance, media, healthcare, as well as the public sector.
The blockchains that have captured the imaginations (and
budgets) of many financial institutions are known as private
blockchains because only certain pre-approved participants
may join them. These blockchains use a variety of means to
ensure the identity of parties to a transaction and to achieve
consensus as to the validity of transactions. The application
of DLT to the real estate sector has been studied in order,
for instance, to establish a unique ledger where transfers of
title can be recorded and searched without the aid of inter-
mediaries or recourse to often-inaccurate government-held
land registries.
Potential Applications
There are at least three logical applications, centered on
the themes of ease of documentation and enhanced record
keeping, particularly concerning title, security interest and
payment tracking.
1. The introduction of smart contracts in operating lease
and financing transactions.
2.
The implementation of a public tracking registry for
ownership and security interests in airframes, engines
and parts.
3.
The implementation of a private trading platform for
debt and equity interests in aircraft.
Needless to say, the above developments would have a
major impact on secondary asset and lease trading (ie, the
novation process), as well as loan trading, syndication and
securitization.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
55
ARTICLE: AVIATION FINANCE UNCHAINED: THE POTENTIAL APPLICATION OF BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY
Potential Issues
While the technology is advancing very quickly, any
successful implementation of these potential applications
will need to navigate a complex patchwork of cross-border
commercial, aviation and tax laws and regulations, including:
1.
Legal Backdrop: A public title-tracking registry for
aircraft would likely require significant legal changes to
domestic and international law. For this reason, a private
platform for trading in aircraft interests (established
pursuant to a commercial network services contract)
might be more feasible in the near term, though the
terms and conditions of these types of trades will need
to be standardized before parties can trade with confi-
dence. It will also take some time for market practice and
judicial precedent around smart contracts to crystallize.
Nevertheless, all financial innovations must go through
this adaptive process and fear of the unknown will not
prevent innovation;
2.
Asset Servicing: A private trading platform would
require servicing arrangements. Not all servicers are
created equal and dierences can have a real economic
impact on the value of aircraft interests. Aircraft
servicing will never become as commoditized as
mortgage servicing, but liquidity could be increased
by promoting industry-wide standards and rating or
monitoring servicers as rating agencies currently do;
3.
Transfer Taxes: The inadvertent sale of an aircraft
while located in the wrong jurisdiction can easily result
in upward of 20% or 30% in transfer taxes. It is possible,
however, to imagine that with the right public databases,
algorithms could digitally track aircraft locations. Until
this can be achieved with a high level of confidence,
manual input from an intermediary will remain a
requirement for equity trades;
4.
Withholding Taxes: Leases and financings into dierent
jurisdictions, and related holdings of debt and equity
interests, must be structured carefully to limit the risk
of withholding tax. Most legal systems generally require
a trustee or other intermediary to act as withholding
agent with respect to cross-border payments in order
to authenticate the recipients and withhold tax where
necessary. In order to fully automate these transactions,
an algorithm would need to incorporate a process for
making and verifying tax certifications and automati-
cally withholding where these cannot be made. There
would most likely still need to be a tax agent to remit
and process any actual withholdings;
5.
Securities Laws and Compliance: One of the key
benefits to DLT is the ease with which secondary trading
can take place. In this context, parties need to have the
confidence that counterparties meet securities law and
legal compliance requirements, including with respect
to sanctions and money laundering. As in the case of
withholding taxes, this would need to be managed in a
private blockchain system with appropriate verification
mechanisms, to the extent that human agency could
legally and practically be dispensed with; and
6. Insurance: Care would need to be taken to ensure that
appropriate backstop policies cover aircraft interest
owners for contingent liability, especially in jurisdic-
tions where passive holders of aircraft interests may be
subject to claims. If the economies of scale are sucient,
one can envision that these risks would be insurable in
an economically viable manner.
The history of aviation finance, one of the most capital-in-
tensive industries, reflects a decades-long arc of increasing
volume and liquidity. This is because in large part to the
development of now indispensable debt and equity financing
techniques, from operating leasing to private equity, and
securitization to portfolio lending. These technologies
have succeeded because of the dedicated eorts of industry
participants and inter-governmental agencies which have
created the conditions, such as the groundbreaking Cape
Town Convention, for their emergence. While certainly
having the potential to be disruptive, blockchain trading of
aircraft interests will be no dierent in requiring a global
coordinated approach in order to achieve its full potential.
Originally published in the Airfinance Journal’s Guide to
Aviation Lawyers 2016.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
56
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Israel (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Israel
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Naschitz, Brandes, Amir & Co.
CONTACT:
ISAAC WINDER, Partner, iwinder@nblaw.com
ILAN WINDER, Partner, ilanwinder@nblaw.com
Overall Score Category
70%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
57%
12.5%
Insolvency
70%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
82%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A+
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
57
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Italy
Jurisdiction(s): Italy
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Studio Pierallini
CONTACT:
LAURA PIERALLINI, Partner, [email protected]
GIANLUIGI ASCENZI, Senior Associate, g[email protected]
Overall Score Category
68%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
75%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
54%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB-
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
Ireland
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
78%
LOWER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
58
++
++
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Japan (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Japan
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: December 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman
Foreign Law Enterprise
CONTACT:
OLIVIA MATSUSHITA, Partner, olivia.matsushita@pillsburylaw.com
MASAO KASATSUGU, Bengoshi, masao.kasatsugu@pillsburylaw.com
Overall Score Category
70%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
43%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A+
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
59
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Jersey (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Jersey
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Mourant Ozannes
CONTACT:
ALASTAIR SYVRET, Partner, Alastair.syvret@mourantozannes.com
JAMES HILL, Partner, James.hill@mourantozannes.com
Overall Score Category
86%
LOWER
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
95%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA-
N/A
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
60
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Jordan (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Jordan
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Ali Sharif Zu’bi Advocates &
Legal Consultants, CPSC
CONTACT:
KHALED ASFOUR, Managing Partner, khaled.asfour@zubilaw.com
LEENA NUSSEIR, Associate, leena.nusseir@zubilaw.com
Overall Score Category
39%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
21%
12.5%
Insolvency
50%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
0%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
25%
30.0%
Political Stability
52%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB-
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
61
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Kenya (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Kenya
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Muthaura Mugambi Ayugi
& Njonjo Advocates
CONTACT:
SUZANNE MUTHAURA, Managing Partner, [email protected].ke
CHRISTOPHER KIRAGU, Senior Associate, ckiragu@mman.co.ke
Overall Score Category
65%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
68%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
18%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B+
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
62
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Korea (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Korea
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Kim & Chang
CONTACT:
ROBERT L. GILBERT, Partner, rlgilbert@kimchang.com
YOUNG MIN KIM, Partner, [email protected]
Overall Score Category
68%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
57%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
83%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
63
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Latvia
Jurisdiction(s): Latvia
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Klavins Ellex
CONTACT:
IVARS SLOKENBERGS, Senior Counsel,
ivars.slokenbergs@klavinsellex.lv
Overall Score Category
58%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
75%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
68%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A-
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
64
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Lebanon
Jurisdiction(s): Lebanon
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
SH Lawyers
CONTACT:
ANTOINE HABIB, Managing Partner, antoine@sh-lawyers.com
AYA MATAR, Senior Associate, aya@sh-lawyers.com
Overall Score Category
28%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
21%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
9%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
San Marino
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
NO
DATA
NO
DATA
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
65
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Lithuania (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Lithuania
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Valiūnas ir partneriai Ellex
CONTACT:
VYTAUTAS ŽELVYS, Senior Associate, vytautas.zelvys@valiunasellex.lt
GEDIMINAS REČIŪNAS, Partner, gediminas.reciunas@valiunasellex.lt
Overall Score Category
70%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
75%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
74%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A-
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
66
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Macau (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Macau, a Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Manuela António - Lawyers
and Notaries
CONTACT:
PEDRO RIBEIRO E CASTRO, Senior Associate, pcastro@mantonio.net
AFONSO CARDOSO DE MENEZES, Foreign Lawyer,
amenezes@mantonio.net
Overall Score Category
60%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
32%
12.5%
Insolvency
80%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
55%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (Moody’s):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA2
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
67
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Malaysia
Jurisdiction(s): Malaysia
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Raja, Darryl & Loh
CONTACT:
CHONG KOK SENG, Partner, kokseng@rdl.com.my
CHEW PHYE KEAT, Management Partner, chewphyekeat@rdl.com.my
Overall Score Category
48%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
64%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
0%
30.0%
Political Stability
61%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A-
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
68
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Mauritius
Jurisdiction(s): Mauritius
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Conyers Dill & Pearman
(Mauritius) limited
CONTACT:
ASHVAN B LUCKRAZ, Associate, Ashvan.Luckraz@conyersdill.com
SAMEER K TEGALLY, Associate, Sameer.Tegally@conyersdill.com
Overall Score Category
66%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
46%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
65%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (Moody’s):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A2
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
69
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Mexico (*)
Jurisdiction(s): United Mexican States
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Abogados Sierra
CONTACT:
CARLOS SIERRA, Partner, csierra@asyv.com
VIRIDIANA BARQUIN, Partner, vbarquin@asyv.com
Overall Score Category
47%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
50%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
0%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
30%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB+
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
70
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Mozambique
Jurisdiction(s): Mozambique
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
CSBA & Associates
CONTACT:
MAFALDA RODRIGUES FONSECA, Partner, [email protected]
ISABEL MARINHO, Partner, [email protected]
Overall Score Category
52%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
46%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
7%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
CCC
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
71
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Myanmar
Jurisdiction(s): Myanmar
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
DFDL Myanmar Limited
CONTACT:
JAMES FINCH, Partner,
james.finch@dfdl.com, jamesfinch1023@yahoo.com
THIDA AYE, Partner, thida.aye@dfdl.com
Overall Score Category
35%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
43%
12.5%
Insolvency
0%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
7%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
N/A
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
NO NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
72
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Namibia
Jurisdiction(s): Namibia
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
ENSafrica|Namibia (incorporated
as Lorentz Angula Inc.)
CONTACT:
WOLF WOHLERS, Director - Corporate Commercial,
wwohlers@Ensafrica.com
Overall Score Category
51%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
46%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
67%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
36%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
NO NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
73
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Netherlands (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Netherlands
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
De Brauw Blackstone
Westbroek N.V.
CONTACT:
BEREND CRANS, Partner, berend.crans@debrauw.com
THIJS ELSEMAN, Associate, thijs.elseman@debrauw.com
Overall Score Category
96%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
82%
12.5%
Insolvency
100%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
100%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
74
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
New Caledonia (*)
Jurisdiction(s): French Territories
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Hena d’Estrees
CONTACT:
YVES HENAFF D’ESTREES, Avocat/Attorney-at-law,
yhena@lexfrance.com
Overall Score Category
71%
MODERATE
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
80%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
N/A
N/A
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
75
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
New Zealand (*)
Jurisdiction(s): New Zealand
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Buddle Findlay
CONTACT:
FRANK PORTER, Partner, frank.porter@buddlefindlay.com
RISHALAT KHAN, Senior Associate, rishalat.khan@buddlefindlay.com
Overall Score Category
95%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
100%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
Australia
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
United States
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
95%
LOWER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
95%
LOWER
NO
YES
NO NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
76
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Nigeria (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Nigeria
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Ajumogobia & Okeke
CONTACT:
PATRICK OSU, Partner, posu@ajumogobiaokeke.com
KATE ONIANWA, Senior Associate, konianwa@ajumogobiaokeke.com
Overall Score Category
60%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
75%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
10%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
77
ARTICLE
Applicability of U.S. Risk Retention Rules to
Structured Aircraft Portfolio Transactions
By Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP (Vanessa C. Gage, Jonathan C. Goldstein
and Mark N. Lessard), Cliord Chance US LLP, Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP,
Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy LLP and Vedder Price P.C.
1 Exchange Act ABS “(A) means a fixed-income or other security collateralized by any type of self-liquidating financial asset (including a loan, a lease, a
mortgage, or a secured or unsecured receivable) that allows the holder of the security to receive payments that depend primarily on cash flow from the
asset, including—
(i) a collateralized mortgage obligation;
(ii) a collateralized debt obligation;
(iii) a collateralized bond obligation;
(iv) a collateralized debt obligation of asset-backed securities;
(v) a collateralized debt obligation of collateralized debt obligations; and
(vi) a security that the Commission, by rule, determines to be an asset-backed security for purposes of this section; and
(B) does not include a security issued by a finance subsidiary held by the parent company or a company controlled by the parent company, if none of the
securities issued by the finance subsidiary are held by an entity that is not controlled by the parent company”.
The purpose of this White Paper is to provide general guidance
to transaction participants and practitioners in their consider-
ation of the application of the provisions of Section 15G of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange
Act”), as added by section 941 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”) and
the federal interagency credit risk retention rules promulgated
thereunder, codified at 17 C.F.R. Part 246 (the “CRR Rules”),
to a typical issuance of securities by a newly formed special
purpose vehicle that owns or will own, among other things, a
portfolio of aircraft and related leases (a “Structured Aircraft
Portfolio Transaction”). This White Paper was prepared by the
law firms named below, but does not reflect the view of any law
firm in the context of any particular transaction. The guidance
set forth in this White Paper is for informational purposes only,
and is subject to change in light of future federal interagency
decisions interpreting the CRR Rules or applicable legislative
or judicial action. Neither this publication nor the law firms
that authored it are rendering legal or other professional
advice or opinions on specific facts or matters, nor does the
distribution of this publication to any person constitute the
establishment of an attorney-client relationship.
I. Introduction
On December 24, 2016 the CRR Rules will come into eect
for all classes of asset backed securities, except for asset-
backed securities collateralized by residential mortgages (for
which the CRR Rules came into eect in December of 2015).
The CRR Rules require that each securitizer of “asset-backed
securities” must retain an economic interest in a portion of
the credit risk for all assets that the securitizer transfers,
sells or conveys to a third party through the issuance of asset-
backed securities. The CRR Rules apply only to issuances of
“asset-backed securities,” as defined in Section 3(a)(79) of the
Exchange Act (referred to herein as “Exchange Act ABS”).
Thus, the gating question is whether a typical Structured
Aircraft Portfolio Transaction constitutes an issuance of:
a fixed-income or other security collateralized by any type
of self-liquidating financial asset (including a loan, a lease, a
mortgage, or a secured or unsecured receivable) that allows
the holder of the security to receive payments that depend
primarily on cash flow from the asset,…”. (emphasis added)
1
For the reasons discussed below, we believe that the
securities issued in a typical Structured Aircraft Portfolio
Transaction do not constitute Exchange Act ABS and accord-
ingly, the CRR Rules would not be applicable.
II. Anatomy of a Structured Aircraft
Portfolio Transaction
In a typical Structured Aircraft Portfolio Transaction, an
aircraft leasing company (the “servicer/seller”) sells a portfolio
of aircraft (together with any associated operating leases) to
a newly formed special purpose vehicle (the “Issuer”). The
Issuer is an orphan special purpose vehicle, owned, in almost
all instances, entirely by a charitable trust. The Issuer finances
its acquisition of the portfolio of aircraft through the issuance
of one or more classes of debt securities and, in many cases,
a sale of its residual (or equity) interests to a third-party
purchaser in the form of a profit participating note (e.g., an E
note). If the transaction includes a sale of equity interests (or
an E note) to a third-party, the purchaser performs extensive
due diligence on the servicer/seller, as well as on the aircraft
and leases owned or to be purchased by the Issuer, an exercise
similar in many respects to the due diligence investigation that
a buyer would perform in connection with the acquisition of a
target company.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
78
ARTICLE: APPLICABILITY OF U.S. RISK RETENTION RULES TO STRUCTURED AIRCRAFT PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS
The Issuer is generally managed by a Board of Directors (the
“Board”) and engages third parties to manage its business.
The servicer typically manages the leasing and disposition
of the aircraft on behalf of the Issuer pursuant to a servicing
agreement, and other third parties often provide admin-
istrative and financial management services to the Issuer
and its Board. Subject to the terms and conditions of the
applicable third-party agreements (including the servicing
agreement), the Board has the authority to terminate the
third-party agreements. In addition, as further set forth
in the third-party agreements, the Board retains certain
approval rights over specific types of transactions, such as
the disposition of aircraft assets.
Upon the acquisition of the aircraft, the Issuer generates
income from (a) rent and related payments under operating
leases of the aircraft to various commercial airlines and (b)
by the sale, part-out or other final disposition of the aircraft
themselves. These cash flows from the Issuer’s business
activities are used by the Issuer to pay operating costs and
expenses, to pay debt service on its debt securities and to
make distributions to equity. Importantly, each aircraft is
typically expected to be re-leased one or more times over
the life of a Structured Aircraft Portfolio Transaction and,
in many cases, ultimately sold or parted-out. In any case,
the expected cash flows from the initial leases are generally
inadequate to repay the debt securities in the absence of
re-leasing or selling most or all of the aircraft. Therefore,
the Issuer’s ability (through the servicer, its Board and other
service providers) to remarket o-lease aircraft for lease,
to manage maintenance expenses and transition costs and
ultimately to sell the aircraft is essential to the performance
of a Structured Aircraft Portfolio Transaction.
III. Definition of Asset-Backed Security
a. SEC Guidance
Although the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”)
has not expressly interpreted the definition of Exchange Act
ABS, it has expressed certain core principles that it considers
inherent to an “asset-backed security” (generically, “ABS”) in
the context of Regulation AB, including “a general absence of
active pool management” and an emphasis on “the self-liqui-
dating nature of pool assets that by their own terms convert
into cash.”
2
Prior to the adoption of Regulation AB, securities
backed by assets which require active behavior to acquire
2 Asset-Backed Securities; Final Rule, SEC Release No. 33-8518, 34-50905, 70 Fed. Reg. 1506, 15 t3 (Jan. 7, 2005) (the “2005 ABS Adopting Release”).
3 The Regulation AB definition means “a security that is primarily serviced by the cash flows of a discrete pool of receivables or other financial assets,
either fixed or revolving, that by their terms convert into cash within a finite time period, plus any rights or other assets designed to assure the servicing
or timely distributions of proceeds to the security holders; provided that in the case of financial assets that are leases, those assets may convert to cash
partially by the cash proceeds from the disposition of the physical property underlying such leases…” (emphasis added)
4 “Eligible assets” means financial assets, either fixed or revolving, that by their terms convert into cash within a finite time period plus any rights or
other assets designed to assure the servicing or timely distribution of proceeds to security holders.
5 SEC Release No. 33-6964 (Oct. 22, 1992) [57 FR 48970].
6 See discussion of the legislative history below.
cash—such as the sale of non-performing assets and physical
property, were generally considered not to constitute asset-
backed securities under the existing registration, disclosure
and reporting regime governing asset-backed securities. In
2005, the SEC codified the predecessor regime in Regulation
AB, and in doing so, not only expressly acknowledged its
belief in these core principles but also recognized that its
existing definition of asset-backed security (the “pre-2005
ABS definition”) would need to be amended if the SEC
desired to include lease-backed securities that had charac-
teristics which were inconsistent with the core principles. As
discussed below, the drafters of Section 15G of the Exchange
Act and the CRR Rules armatively elected not to adopt the
SEC’s amended definition of asset-backed security under
Regulation AB, choosing instead to use a definition that is
strikingly similar to the pre-2005 ABS definition.
In 1992, as a part of amendments to Form S-3, the SEC origi-
nally adopted the pre-2005 ABS definition of “asset-backed
security,” meaning a security that is “primarily serviced
by the cash flows of a discrete pool of receivables or other
financial assets, either fixed or revolving, that by their terms
convert into cash within a finite time period plus any rights
or other assets designed to assure the servicing or timely
distribution of proceeds to the security holders.” In 2005,
as a part of Regulation AB, the SEC expanded the scope of
the pre-2005 ABS definition to include certain transactions
backed by leases for purposes of the rules and forms for
the registration, disclosure, and reporting requirements for
asset-backed securities under the Securities Act and the
Exchange Act (the “Regulation AB definition”).
3
Regulation
AB and the predecessor rules for reporting, registration and
disclosure are not the only context in which the SEC has
considered the meaning of an asset-backed security. The SEC
also defines “eligible assets”
4
within the meaning of Rule 3a-7
of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “‘40
Act definition”), a definition which is generally considered
functionally equivalent to the pre-2005 ABS definition.
5
Although Dodd-Frank did not adopt any of these pre-ex-
isting definitions of asset-backed security
6
, the definition
of Exchange Act ABS is similar to both the pre-2005
ABS definition and the ’40 Act definition in that (a) the
primary assets collateralizing the applicable securities
must be “self-liquidating,” a phrase the SEC has often used
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
79
ARTICLE: APPLICABILITY OF U.S. RISK RETENTION RULES TO STRUCTURED AIRCRAFT PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS
interchangeably with “converts into cash within a finite time
period”
7
and (b) in contrast to the Regulation AB definition,
none of these definitions expressly includes securities
backed by leases which do not self-liquidate. Accordingly,
just as most securities backed by leased assets were excluded
from the scope of the pre-2005 ABS definition and continue
to be excluded under the ’40 Act definition today, we believe
that securities that are substantially dependent on active
management of physical assets for payment, including the
re-leasing, sale or other disposition of such assets, are not
within the scope of Exchange Act ABS.
In 2005, when the SEC expanded the pre-2005 ABS
definition in order to include lease-backed ABS where part
of the cash flows to repay the securities was anticipated
to come from the disposal of the physical asset underlying
the lease, the SEC was clear that the change was made as a
special accommodation to the pre-2005 ABS definition solely
for purposes of bringing such lease-backed ABS into the
Regulation AB registration, reporting and disclosure regime.
8
The SEC was also clear that the change did not represent
a shift in the SEC’s fundamental belief in what types of
securities should constitute an “asset-backed security.” In
expanding the definition of “asset-backed security” under
Regulation AB, the SEC acknowledged that the inclusion
of any significant amount of residual value represented a
deviation in one of the core principles of the meaning of an
asset-backed security, explaining at the time:
However, as we explained in the Proposing Release, even
though we are recognizing the growth in lease-backed
ABS that include securitizations of residual value, such
securitizations are subject to additional factors that are not
present in securitizations backed solely by financial assets
that convert into cash. Residual value is often determined at
the inception of a lease contract and represents an estimate
of the leased property’s resale value at the end of the lease.
Assumptions and modeling are necessary to determine the
amount of the residual value. In addition, the transaction is
not simply dependent on the servicing and amortization of
the pool assets, but also on the capability and performance
of the party that will be used to convert the physical property
into cash and thus realize the residual values.
The higher the percentage of cash flows that are to come
from residual values, the more important these other factors
become and the less the transaction resembles a traditional
7 Id at 5.
8 As stated in the 2005 ABS Adopting Release: “[t]he one change we proposed making to the basic definition of “asset-backed security” is to expand the
definition to include securitizations backed by leases where part of the cash flows backing the securities is to come from the disposal of the residual
asset underlying the lease (e.g., selling an automobile at the end of an automobile lease). In that instance, the asset-backed securities are not backed
solely by financial assets that “by their terms convert into cash,” because the transaction also involves a physical asset that must be sold in order to
obtain cash. As a result, securitizations where a portion of the cash flow to repay the securities is anticipated to come from the residual value of the
physical property do not fall within the current definition of “asset-backed security” in Form S-3 and thus are often registered on a non-shelf basis on
Form S-1.”
securitization of financial assets for which our regime
for asset-backed securities is designed. Although some
commenters did not believe we should have any limits on
residual values, we continue to believe, as discussed above,
that the core principle that an asset-backed security should
be primarily serviced by financial assets that by their terms
convert into cash should be retained. At the same time, we
believe a defined limited exception to this general principle
is appropriate and consistent for access to the alternate
regulatory regime for certain lease-backed ABS.” (2005 ABS
Adopting Release) Indeed, the SEC sought to mitigate any
adverse eects of this deviation from this core principle:
As we explained in the Proposing Release, we are addressing
concerns with the deviation from the core principle in two
principal ways. First, we are adopting disclosures… on how
residual values are estimated and derived, statistical infor-
mation on historical realization rates and disclosure of the
manner and process in which residual values will be realized,
including disclosure about the entity that will convert the
residual values into cash. Second, we are establishing
limits on the percentage of the securitized pool balance
attributable to residual values in order to be considered an
“asset-backed security.” We believe these changes will expand
eligibility of lease-backed transactions for shelf registration
and appropriately permit lease-backed transactions under
our new rules while continuing to apply the core principles
underlying the definition of “asset-backed security.” (2005
ABS Adopting Release)
The intent to exclude certain asset-backed securities from
the definition of Exchange Act ABS that have character-
istics which are inconsistent with the core principles is also
evidenced by the fact that the ’40 Act definition has not been
amended in a manner similar to the Regulation AB definition
and, accordingly, asset-backed securities that are substan-
tially dependent on the residual value of the leased assets
for repayment are generally outside the scope of the ’40 Act
definition. As stated by the American Bar Association in its
November 2011 response to the SEC’s notice of proposed
rulemaking regarding Rule 3a-7:
The current definition of “eligible assets” in Rule 3a-7 limits
the ability to execute certain lease securitizations. This
definition covers only financial assets that “by their terms
convert into cash within a finite time period.” Virtually
all auto leases, and a significant portion of equipment
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
80
ARTICLE: APPLICABILITY OF U.S. RISK RETENTION RULES TO STRUCTURED AIRCRAFT PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS
leases, permit the lessee to return the vehicle or leased
equipment upon lease termination in lieu of purchasing
that property. The residual value of the auto or equipment
that is realized upon liquidation of the returned auto or
equipment is an important part of the securitization value
of the leasing arrangement. This residual value, however,
does not currently fall within the definition of “eligible asset,”
because such residual value is not itself a financial asset that
“convert[s] into cash within a finite time period.”
b. Legislative History
The legislative history also supports the view that the
dierences between the definitions of Exchange Act ABS
and ’40 Act definition, on the one hand, and the Regulation
AB definition, on the other hand, are not accidental. The final
House Bill (H.R. 4173) (Dodd Frank) originally proposed
using the Regulation AB definition, which would have
without a doubt included such lease-backed ABS within
the scope of an “asset-backed security” and definitively
established a bright line test of greater (or less) than 50%
of residual value.
9
The Senate however rejected the proposed
definition of “asset-backed security” used in the final House
Bill in favor of the alternative definition of Exchange Act ABS,
which notably does not include any language that would
expressly expand its meaning to include lease-backed ABS
to the extent dependent on the sale (or other disposition)
of the leased asset for repayment. Therefore, on the basis
of the previously understood meanings of the pre-2005
definition, the Regulation AB definition and the ’40 Act
definition, together with the SEC’s statements regarding the
characteristics of an asset-backed security in those contexts,
we believe that the drafters of the CRR Rules deliberately
excluded lease-backed ABS which does not self-liquidate
from the definition of Exchange Act ABS.
IV. Application of Definition to Structured Aircraft
Portfolio Transaction
a. Are Assets in a Structured Aircraft Portfolio Transaction
Self-Liquidating Financial Assets?
On the plain meaning of the words, an aircraft is not a
financial asset, and there is no guidance or interpretation
from the SEC to indicate that aircraft or similar physical
assets are financial assets. Accordingly, the presence of the
aircraft leases alone would presumably need to satisfy a
principal requirement of Exchange Act ABS that the “assets”
consist of self-liquidating financial assets “that allow[s] the
holder of the security to receive payments that depend
primarily on cash flow from the asset”. We do not believe
this to be the case.
9 We note that the overwhelming majority of recent Structured Aircraft Portfolio Transactions would also fall outside of the scope of the Regulation AB
definition for this reason.
10 “[T]he basic definition [of asset backed security] is suciently broad to encompass any self-liquidating asset which by its terms converts into cash
payments within a finite time period.” Id at 5.
Neither Section 15G of the Exchange Act nor the associated
CRR Rules define all of the terms used in the definition of
“asset-backed security,” including “self-liquidating” and
“primarily.” However, the term “self-liquidating” has been
defined by the courts for nearly a century:
“The mechanism is called a self-liquidating loan because
when the banks purchase the notes, they also purchase the
right to receive interest payments before the notes mature.
Thus, the money expended to buy a note will be repaid by the
interim interest payments and the final principal payment.”
United States v. Esogbue, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 45265, No.
94-20615 (5th Cir. Feb. 12, 1996).
“A self-liquidating project may be defined as one wherein the
revenues received are sucient to pay the bonded debt and
interest charges over a period of time.” Kelley v. Earle, 325
Pa. 337, 345 (Pa. 1937).
Further, although the SEC has not separately defined
“self-liquidating,” it has used the phrase to describe an
asset that “converts into cash payments within a finite time
period.”
10
Based on the foregoing, the generally accepted legal
meaning of “self-liquidating” refers to an asset that will
independently generate income sufficient to pay back
its original cost. The presence of any meaningful depen-
dence on additional cash flows that are contingent on the
success of future business activities (such as the level of
active management required for a Structured Aircraft
Portfolio Transaction, as described above) is inconsistent
with that meaning of “self-liquidating”, and therefore we
do not believe that the leases backing a typical Structured
Aircraft Portfolio Transaction are “self-liquidating.” In
addition to the cash flows from the initial aircraft leases
being insucient to repay the original cost of the aircraft
(and initial leases) in a typical Structured Aircraft Portfolio
Transaction, an aircraft operating lease does not “convert
into cash” because upon the expiry of a typical lease, the
aircraft is expected to be returned to the Issuer.
b. Does Repayment Depend Primarily on Cash Flow from
Self-Liquidating Financial Assets?
The securities in a typical Structured Aircraft Portfolio
Transaction bear greater similarity to corporate bonds issued
by an operating company and secured by all of it its assets (or
a selected portfolio of its equipment and related assets) than
they bear to securities backed by a defined pool of financial
assets. In the case of a typical Structured Aircraft Portfolio
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
81
ARTICLE: APPLICABILITY OF U.S. RISK RETENTION RULES TO STRUCTURED AIRCRAFT PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS
Transaction, like any secured corporate bond, repayment
of the Issuer’s debt depends on management’s ability to
generate sucient operating income through the successful
operation of its business as discussed above.
As described above, the ability of the securitized “financial
assets” to generate sucient cash to service the securities
is the defining characteristic of ABS. However, in a typical
Structured Aircraft Portfolio Transaction, the cash flows
from the initial leases are not only insucient to repay the
original acquisition cost of the aircraft (and initial leases)
but are also significantly less than the amount required to
repay the Issuer’s securities.
In addition to having the financial resources necessary to
incur significant out-of-pocket expenses in connection with
redelivery, refurbishing and repositioning any aircraft for
a new lease or sale, successfully remarketing an aircraft
also requires marketing, maintenance, and other aircraft
management expertise. The costs and resources involved
in managing the leasing, re-marketing and maintenance
of an aircraft, whether on- or o-lease, are inconsistent
with a principal requirement of Exchange Act ABS that
repayment of the securities must rely primarily on cash
flows generated from a pool of self-liquidating financial
assets.
This remains true even if aircraft operating leases were
considered separately from the value of the physical aircraft
and could be independently characterized as “self-liqui-
dating financial assets”. It would still be inaccurate to
describe repayment of the securities in a typical Structured
Aircraft Portfolio Transaction as depending primarily on the
cash flows from the initial leases. Rather, ultimate repayment
of the securities depends on the servicer’s ability to re-lease
and ultimately dispose of the aircraft.
V. Conclusion
For the reasons discussed above, we believe that, if properly
interpreted and applied, the definition of Exchange Act ABS
would not include a typical Structured Aircraft Portfolio
Transaction. The “assets” in a Structured Aircraft Portfolio
Transaction should not be considered self-liquidating
financial assets and, although the SEC and other relevant
federal agencies have yet to interpret the definition of
Exchange Act ABS, the principles discussed by the SEC in
the context of the pre-2005 ABS definition, the Regulation
AB definition and the ’40 Act definition should equally
apply to an analysis of the securities in a Structured Aircraft
Portfolio Transaction with the result that a typical Structured
Aircraft Portfolio Transaction would not be subject to the
CRR Rules.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
82
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Norway (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Norway
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Arntzen de Besche Advokatfirma AS
CONTACT:
PAUL SVEINSSON, Partner, [email protected]
ATLE STENSRUD, Senior Associate, atle.stensrud@adeb.no
Overall Score Category
80%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
86%
12.5%
Insolvency
80%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
25%
30.0%
Political Stability
100%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
Ireland
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
Denmark
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
86%
LOWER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
84%
LOWER
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
83
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Oman
Jurisdiction(s): Oman
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Trowers & Hamlins LLP
CONTACT:
ROGER CLARKE, Partner, rclarke@trowers.com
SIMON VALNER, Solicitor, svalner@trowers.com
Overall Score Category
51%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
57%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
41%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB-
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
84
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Pakistan (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Pakistan
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Kabraji & Talibuddin
CONTACT:
KAIRAS N. KABRAJI, Senior Partner, kairas.kabraji@kandtlaw.com
SYED ALI BIN MAAZ, Partner, ali.maaz@kandtlaw.com
Overall Score Category
55%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
68%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
9%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B-
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
85
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Papua New Guinea (*)
Jurisdiction(s): National; Provincial; Autonomous Region of Bougainville
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Ashurst, Port Moresby
CONTACT:
RICHARD FLYNN, Partner, [email protected]
TIM GLENN, Partner, Tim.Glenn@ashurst.com
Overall Score Category
48%
HIGHER
(**) Overall Score disregards Political
Stability (insucient data)
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
57%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
67%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
No data
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B+
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(**)
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
86
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Peru
Jurisdiction(s): Peru
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Rodrigo, Elías & Medrano, Abogados
CONTACT:
JORGE VELARDE, Partner, jvelarde@estudiorodrigo.com
FERNANDO HURTADO DE MENDOZA, Associate,
demendoza@estudiorodrigo.com
Overall Score Category
40%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
36%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
22%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB+
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
United States
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
Chile
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
48%
HIGHER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
NO
DATA
NO
DATA
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
87
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Poland (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Poland
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Spaczyński, Szczepaniak i Wspólnicy (SSW)
CONTACT:
PIOTR SPACZYŃSKI, Partner, piotr.spaczynski@ssw.pl
FILIP BALCERZAK, Associate, filip.balcerzak@ssw.pl
Overall Score Category
68%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
50%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
75%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB+
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
88
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Portugal
Jurisdiction(s): Portugal
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
CSBA
CONTACT:
MAFALDA RODRIGUES FONSECA, Partner, [email protected]
ISABEL MARINHO, Partner, [email protected]
Overall Score Category
73%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
54%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
70%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB+
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
89
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Romania
Jurisdiction(s): Romania
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
ŢUCA ZBĂRCEA & ASOCIAŢII
CONTACT:
CĂTĂLIN BĂICULESCU, Partner, [email protected]
ROXANA PANĂ, Senior Associate, rox[email protected]
Overall Score Category
42%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
39%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
39%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB-
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
90
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Russia
Jurisdiction(s): Russian Federation
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
RODIN VADIYAN SHURYGIN LLC
CONTACT:
ALEXANDER SHURYGIN, Partner, a.shurygin@rvs-law.com
ALEXANDER RODIN, Managing Partner, a.rodin@rvs-law.com
Overall Score Category
36%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
21%
12.5%
Insolvency
100%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
15%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB+
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
Bermuda
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
Ireland
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
44%
HIGHER
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
44%
HIGHER
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
91
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Rwanda
Jurisdiction(s): Rwanda
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
ENSafrica Rwanda Limited
CONTACT:
GILBERT NYATANYI, Executive, gnyatanyi@ensafrica.com
JEAN CLAUDE KABERA, Associate, jkabera@ensafrica.com
Overall Score Category
59%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
68%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
32%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
92
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Slovenia
Jurisdiction(s): Slovenia
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Odvetniki Šelih &
partnerji, o.p., d.o.o.
CONTACT:
MIA KALAŠ, Partner, [email protected]
BLAŽ OGOREVC, Partner, blaz.[email protected]
Overall Score Category
66%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
68%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
75%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
A
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
93
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
South Africa (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Republic of South Africa
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: October 2016
COMPLETED BY:
ENSafrica, Sandton oce
CONTACT:
SEAN LEDERMAN, Director, [email protected]
Overall Score Category
66%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
50%
12.5%
Insolvency
100%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
55%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BBB-
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
94
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Sri Lanka
Jurisdiction(s): Sri Lanka
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Lasantha Hettiarachchi
& Associates
CONTACT:
MR LASANTHA HETTIARACHCHI, Precedent Partner,
[email protected], lhlaw@eureka.lk
MS. PIYUM DASSANAYAKE, Partner, pdassanayake@yahoo.com.sg
Overall Score Category
48%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
57%
12.5%
Insolvency
40%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
28%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B+
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
95
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Switzerland (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Switzerland
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Lenz & Staehelin
CONTACT:
OLIVIER STAHLER, Partner, olivier.stahler@lenzstaehelin.com
EMILIE JACOT-GUILLARMOD, Associate,
emilie.jacot-guillarmod@lenzstaehelin.com
Overall Score Category
79%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
71%
12.5%
Insolvency
80%
10.0%
Deregistration
20%
10.0%
Export
75%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
100%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AAA
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
96
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Taiwan (Republic of China) (*)
Jurisdiction(s): Taiwan
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
RUSSIN & VECCHI
CONTACT:
THOMAS H. MCGOWAN, Sr. U.S. Licensed Attorney,
THMcGowan@russinvecchi.com.tw
H. Y. CHO, Senior Professional, HYCho@russinvecchi.com.tw
Overall Score Category
76%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
71%
12.5%
Insolvency
80%
10.0%
Deregistration
0%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
67%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
90%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA-
N/A
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
NO
YES
YES YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
97
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Turkey
Jurisdiction(s): Turkey
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Ersoy Bilgehan Lawyers
and Consultants
CONTACT:
ALI KARTAL, Partner, [email protected]
MELIS SAYGIN, Associate, msaygin@ersoybilgehan.com
Overall Score Category
65%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
75%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
25%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
98
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Ukraine
Jurisdiction(s): Ukraine
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Jurvneshservice International
Legal Services
CONTACT:
ANNA TSIRAT, Partner, a.tsirat@jvs.com.ua
Overall Score Category
43%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
71%
12.5%
Insolvency
50%
10.0%
Deregistration
40%
10.0%
Export
25%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
50%
30.0%
Political Stability
10%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
B-
NO
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
NO
YES
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
99
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
United Arab Emirates
Jurisdiction(s): Federal law
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: August 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Al Jallaf Advocates &
Legal Consultants
CONTACT:
AMNA AL JALLAF, Managing Partner, amna.aljallaf@aljallaflegal.com
JEREMY A. BROWN, Senior Lawyer, jeremy.brown@aljallaflegal.com
Overall Score Category
51%
MODERATE
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
21%
12.5%
Insolvency
20%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
75%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (Moody’s):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA2
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
100
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
United Kingdom (*)
Jurisdiction(s): England & Wales
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
CONTACT:
DEBRA ERNI, Partner, debra.erni@pillsburylaw.com
GRAHAM TYLER, Partner, graham.tyler@pillsburylaw.com
Overall Score Category
89%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
89%
12.5%
Insolvency
60%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
YES
YES NO
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
++
++
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
101
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
United States (*)
Jurisdiction(s): U.S. (Federal laws); New York
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: December 2016
COMPLETED BY:
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
CONTACT:
MARK LESSARD, Partner, mark.lessard@pillsburylaw.com
LEO T. CROWLEY, Partner, leo.crowley@pillsburylaw.com
Overall Score Category
96%
LOWER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
96%
12.5%
Insolvency
90%
10.0%
Deregistration
100%
10.0%
Export
100%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
100%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
100%
30.0%
Political Stability
94%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
AA+
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
102
Yes
Aircra Registration
Key Facts
†
More Results
Time & Cost Indicators
R
E
P
O
S
S
E
S
S
I
O
N
I
N
S
O
L
V
E
N
C
Y
D
E
R
E
G
I
S
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
E
X
P
O
R
T
J
U
D
G
./
A
R
B
.
P
R
E
F
.
L
I
E
N
S
P
O
L
I
T
I
C
A
L
S
T
A
B
I
L
I
T
Y
Vietnam
Jurisdiction(s): Vietnam
ONE-PAGE SUMMARIES
Up to Date: September 2016
COMPLETED BY:
VILAF
CONTACT:
VO HA DUYEN, Chairperson/Partner, duyen@vilaf.com.vn
TRAN MAI ANH, Associate, maianh.tran@vilaf.com.vn
Overall Score Category
45%
HIGHER
Weighting Score:
22.5%
Repossession
57%
12.5%
Insolvency
50%
10.0%
Deregistration
80%
10.0%
Export
50%
7.5%
Judgments/Arb.
33%
7.5%
Preferential Liens
75%
30.0%
Political Stability
16%
++
++
$
50,000 60 days 60 days
$
250,000 180 days 180 days
$
1,000,000 1 year 1 year/
variable
Insolvency
Moratorium
Period (time)
Speed of
Repossession
(time)
Legal Cost of
Repossession
($)
CHEAPER/FASTER
Sovereign credit rating (S&P):
OECD high-income/zero-rated
country:
Cape Town Contracting State:
Eligible for ASU Cape Town Discount:
Self-help (Lessor-owners):
Self-help (Mortgagees):
Moderately or well-developed
insolvency laws:
Absence of significant taxes or similar
fees payable on export:
Absence of fleetwide liens:
a New York court judgment:
an English court judgment:
an arbitral award:
BB-
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
Possible principal registrants:
Owner (if not also the operator):
Operator (if not also the owner):
Additional interests that may be noted, either on the
aircraft register, some other pulbic register, or on the
certificate of registration:
Owner: Mortgagee:
Please send any requests for more detailed
results or the full set of responses to the
Jurisdictional Questionnaire to:
repoindex@pillsburylaw.com
Before using the information on this page, please
read the GENERAL DISCLAIMER on page 2.
Alternative Country
of Registration #1:
N/A
Alternative Country
of Registration #2:
N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
Blended
Score:
Blended
Category:
N/A N/A
YES
NO
YES N/A
Poorer
score
Better
score
Estimated
potential
cost/speed
Estimated
does not
exceed range
N.B. Low political stability may aect reliability of these values
(*) Local counsel has provided additional notes for this country.
All such notes are set out on page 107 et. seq.
†
Additional information regarding third party data
is set out on page 148.
No
Local court will enforce, without reexamination
of case on merits…
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
103
ARTICLE
All Hat and No Chattel:
Does Aircraft Lease Chattel Paper Still Matter After Cape Town?
by Mark Lessard and Melissa Jones-Prus
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
It has long been common practice for financiers to perfect
security in an aircraft lease by taking possession of a single,
original chattel paper counterpart of the underlying lease,
in addition to recording their interests in various—and
sometimes overlapping—registries. In an increasingly
electronic and international legal environment for aircraft
finance, most recently bolstered by the adoption and
implementation of the Cape Town Convention in many key
jurisdictions, the time has come to reassess the legal and
practical benefits of using chattel paper in aircraft financing.
The Uniform Commercial Code (the “UCC”)
1
aords a
super-priority to purchasers in the ordinary course who give
new value and take possession of tangible chattel paper in
good faith, without knowledge that the purchase violates the
rights of a secured party.
2
In this article, we argue that the
Cape Town Convention on Interests in Mobile Equipment
preempts this UCC rule and that the proper registration of
an assignment of associated rights (together with its related
international interest) in accordance with the Convention
is sucient, as a matter of U.S. law, to protect secured
creditors from the risks that parties have historically sought
to mitigate through the creation and delivery of chattel paper
as a means of perfecting security.
While there is no case law on point (and almost no case
law involving the Convention) at this time, we believe
the relevant courts should—and will—apply the well-es-
tablished doctrine of pre-emption developed under the
Federal Aviation Act to the Convention. The Convention
by its terms overrides the otherwise applicable law (in this
case the UCC) to the extent, but only to the extent, that it
applies
to a particular topic. Furthermore, the Convention
clearly applies to and regulates the priority of interests
in aircraft lease chattel paper (which interests comprise
“associated rights and their related international interest”,
in the parlance of the Convention) because aircraft lease
chattel paper is intended by definition to create an interest
in an “aircraft object.” Therefore, transaction parties should
consider dispensing with aircraft lease chattel paper once
and for all.
New Technology Background
What is Chattel Paper?
“Chattel paper” is often referred to as a quasi-negotiable
instrument, which aords its holder certain presumptive
rights and priorities. It is defined by the Uniform Commercial
Code as a record that evidences both a monetary obligation
and a security interest in specific goods (in the case of
mortgage chattel paper) or a lease of specific goods (in the
case of lease chattel paper).
3
Practically speaking, it is a
specially marked original copy of a security agreement or
lease that contains the right to debt service, rental or other
payments. The UCC does not distinguish between finance
leases and operating leases for this purpose.
Why does Chattel Paper exist?
The rules surrounding chattel paper emerged to reflect
common commercial practice when the original UCC
Article 9 was conceived in the 1940s and 50s.
4
The key rule
creates a super-priority for a purchaser or secured creditor
in possession of tangible chattel paper.
5
Even though a sale
or security interest in chattel paper can be perfected by filing
a UCC-1 financing statement,
6
the UCC provides that a good
faith purchaser in the ordinary course, who provides new
value and has no actual knowledge
7
of a secured creditor’s
priority, takes the chattel paper and associated rights free
and clear of the secured creditor’s prior interest.
How Is Chattel Paper Used in Aircraft Finance?
Lease chattel paper is still commonly used in connection
with the back-leveraging of aircraft operating and finance
leases. In the typical case, a lender that is looking to a lease as
additional collateral for a loan made in respect of an aircraft
will require delivery to it of a single chattel paper counterpart
that bears a “legend” indicating that it has been assigned to
such lender as security. The secured lenders are eectively
seeking to protect against the fraudulent creation and sale
of the lease chattel paper (and the underlying receivable)
to a good faith purchaser for value. Under the UCC, such
a purchaser has priority not only in respect of monetary
obligations under the lease, but also in respect of the lease
itself.
8
This generally implies the right to step into the shoes
of the lessor and recover possession of the leased goods in
the event of a default by the lessee, but only to the extent
that the goods constitute proceeds of the chattel paper.
9
In
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
104
ARTICLE: ALL HAT AND NO CHATTEL
the case of an operating lease, therefore, chattel paper rights
do not extend to the residual value of the goods absent an
independent security interest in the goods themselves. But
this is of little solace to a secured lender when the lessee has
quiet enjoyment rights and the cash flow from its collateral
is diverted to a subsequent purchase in good faith.
Mortgage chattel paper typically is not used in the context of
aircraft and other large ticket secured transactions. Where
desired by the parties in these transactions, payment obliga-
tions are set forth in a promissory note. The promissory
note incorporates the terms of a loan or other financing
agreement by reference, which itself contains relevant
terms and conditions, including restrictions on transfer.
Unlike mortgage chattel paper, however, the promissory
note embodies a payment obligation only and not a security
interest in specific goods. As will be discussed below, the
fact that chattel paper embodies an interest in specific
aircraft objects is precisely the reason why we believe the
Convention preempts the super-priority rule under the UCC.
What’s the Problem with Lease Chattel Paper?
The main issues transaction parties have with using chattel
paper is that it adds to transaction costs, is cumbersome to
administer and by its very existence creates some of the risks
it is trying to mitigate.
•
While the cost of generating a chattel paper original
bearing a security legend for a single aircraft financing
may not be prohibitive, the numbers add up when multi-
plied over the hundreds and thousands of aircraft that
are financed and re-financed every year.
• Similarly, the administrative costs to lenders of storing
and tracking these quasi-negotiable instruments—and
of returning them upon release of the collateral—are
not immaterial when considered industry or portfo-
lio-wide. Some lenders even appoint custodians, at a cost
of several thousand dollars for the life of the transaction,
for the sole purpose of holding these instruments.
• Finally, where a secured party misplaces chattel paper
(something not altogether unusual in the context of
long-term financings), a party coming into possession
of it could cause problems; moreover, the secured party
will be required to provide a lost instrument indemnity
to the lessor/borrower at the end of term, so the tail on
this exposure is at least theoretically indefinite.
10
Secured lenders are not in the business of taking any legal
risks with respect to their collateral and so understandably
will require chattel paper where it serves its intended
function. Rating agencies have also been known to require
chattel paper originals in connection with rated transactions.
However, the implementation of the Convention in the
United States calls into question the eectiveness of chattel
paper as a risk mitigant.
Application of the Cape Town Convention
What Is the Cape Town Convention?
The Cape Town Convention on Interests in Mobile
Equipment (“CTC”) is an international treaty designed
to facilitate the ecient financing and leasing of mobile
equipment. The CTC applies to airframes, aircraft engines
and helicopters (“aircraft objects”) by virtue of the Aircraft
Protocol (together with the CTC, the “Convention”).
The Convention by its terms overrides the otherwise appli-
cable law (including the UCC) to the extent, but only to the
extent, that it applies to a particular topic.
11
Does the Cape Town Convention Cover Chattel Paper?
The Convention does not employ the legal nomenclature of
any particular legal system and therefore does not specifically
mention chattel paper. Rather, it creates a jurisdictionally
neutral legal regime centered on “international interests”
and “associated rights.”
•
International interests are essentially interests granted
by the chargor under a security agreement, or vested in
a person who is the conditional seller under a title reser-
vation agreement or a lessor under a leasing agreement.
•
Associated rights are essentially rights to payment or
other performance by a debtor under an agreement,
which rights are secured by or associated with the object.
Purely personal contractual rights not secured by an
aircraft object are outside the scope of the Convention.
Under the Convention, a security assignment of associated
rights (i.e., of rights to receive rentals under a lease) transfers
the related international interest (i.e., grants security in
the lessor’s legal interest under the related lease) so long
as the security instrument (1) is in writing, (2) enables the
associated rights to be identified and (3) enables the obliga-
tions secured to be identified.
12
Importantly, the Convention does not apply to an assignment
of associated rights which is not eective to transfer the
related international interest.
13
In the case of a lease, then,
the Convention does not apply to an assignment of payment
intangibles separate and apart from an assignment of
lessor’s interest under the lease. Nor does it apply to a pure
receivables financing or repackaging, even if the receivables
constitute aircraft lease or loan income. This is because
the Convention regulates only the priority of interests in
aircraft objects and associated rights that bear a sucient
connection to the underlying aircraft object.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
105
ARTICLE: ALL HAT AND NO CHATTEL
Unlike the transfer of general payment intangibles or
promissory notes, the delivery of “aircraft object” chattel
paper is a legal act that purports to transfer associated
rights for the aircraft object and their related international
interest. Such legal act is governed by the Convention
and the Convention’s rules governing the priority of
competing interests in associated rights should preempt the
super-priority rule applying to chattel paper under the UCC.
What Is the Preemption Doctrine?
Article 9-109(c) of the UCC expressly provides that UCC
Article 9 does not apply to the extent that a statute, treaty
or regulation of the United States preempts its provisions.
While there is no case law on point involving the Convention
at this time, there is a well-developed string of jurispru-
dence involving the Federal Aviation Act (the “Act”)
14
that
should give precedence to the priority rules set forth in the
Convention where they apply and conflict with the UCC.
The seminal case on preemption is the Supreme Court case
of Philko Aviation, Inc. v. Shacket,
15
which held that all state
laws (including the UCC) permitting unrecorded transfers
to eect the interests of third parties in aircraft conflict with,
and are preempted by, the Act.
[Section] § 503(c) [of the Act] means that every aircraft
transfer must be evidenced by an instrument, and every
such instrument must be recorded, before the rights
of innocent third parties can be aected. Furthermore,
because of these federal requirements, state laws
permitting undocumented or unrecorded transfers are
preempted, for there is a direct conflict between § 503(c)
and such state laws, and the federal law must prevail.
16
In coming to its decision, the Court relied on the legislative
history of the Act, in particular Congress’ intention to create
a “central clearing house” for recordation of title and other
interests in aircraft. The Court noted that if state laws permitting
a valid transfer to be eected without recording with the FAA
were not preempted by the federal law, then there would be no
need or incentive for a buyer in possession to record its interest
with the FAA.
17
Subsequent cases have armed the approach
in Philko.
18
Do the Priority Rules Under the Convention Preempt State
Law?
In order for the preemption doctrine to apply in this case,
the Convention must specifically address and conflict with
the super-priority rule set out at 9-330 of the UCC. In other
words, the Convention must govern the priority of interests
in “aircraft object” chattel paper.
We strongly believe that chattel paper created in respect
of an “aircraft object” creates an interest in that “aircraft
object” and is therefore governed by the Convention. We
have explained how the delivery of such chattel paper
constitutes an assignment of an international interest and
associated rights under the Convention where all of the
Convention’s formalities have been respected. We will now
examine the general priority rule under the Convention, and
how it applies to associated rights.
How Does the Convention Establish Priority?
Unlike the Act, which does not address the priority of interests
in aircraft but leaves it to state law to determine, one of the
Convention’s main purposes is to establish an international
system for regulating the priority of interests in aircraft
objects. Article 29 of the Convention sets out the main thrust
of the Convention on priority: the “first in time” rule. It states
that a registered interest has priority over any other interest
subsequently registered and over an unregistered interest.
19
This priority applies even if the first-registered interest is
acquired with actual knowledge of another interest. There can
be exceptions to this priority rule resulting from the creation
of “non-consensual” interests under applicable national law,
such as mechanic’s liens or other rights of detention,
20
but
the UCC chattel paper super-priority rule relates only to
the consensual interests and cannot be saved by this exception.
How Does the Convention Resolve Competing Interests in
Associated Rights?
The priority of competing assignments is addressed in
Articles 35 and 36 of the Convention. They provide that
the “first in time” priority rule of Article 29 applies to an
assignment of associated rights that is coupled with an
assignment of the related international interest where there
is a sucient connection between the associated rights and
the aircraft object. The key to our argument in this article is
that aircraft lease chattel paper (1) creates an international
interest in an aircraft object and (2) constitutes associated
rights that are “object-related,” in the parlance of the
Convention. Accordingly, any transfer or pledge of aircraft
lease chattel paper necessarily constitutes an assignment
of an international interest coupled with associated rights
that is registrable under the Convention, so long as the
formalities of the Convention are met.
21
Because the Convention is specifically designed to impact
only the priority of interests in aircraft objects, Article 36
strictly limits the ability of an assignee of associated rights
to claim the priority aorded by the Convention to those
associated rights that are “object-related,” i.e., that bear a
sucient connection to the underlying aircraft object.
22
More specifically, an assignment of associated rights will
benefit from the “first in time” priority rule where:
1.
The contract under which the associated rights arise
states that they are secured by (in the case of a mortgage)
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
106
ARTICLE: ALL HAT AND NO CHATTEL
or associated with (in the case of a lease) the aircraft
object; and
2.
The associated rights are “object-related,” i.e., they
consist of rights to payment or performance that relate
to, among other items, the price payable for the aircraft
object or the rentals payable in respect of the aircraft
object (together with all ancillary obligations).
Meeting these requirements contained in Article 36 should
bring the priority rules of the Convention to bear and preempt
the UCC super-priority rule on chattel paper. And they are
not that dicult to meet in the case of lease chattel paper.
• The requirement in (b) above should automatically be
met in the standard case of aircraft lease chattel paper,
because—once again—lease chattel paper by definition
relates to the rentals payable in respect of the aircraft.
•
However, the requirement in (a) above appears to
require that parties include specific wording in their
chattel paper lease in order to “opt in” to the priority
rules of the Convention. This may seem like a formal-
istic requirement,
23
but it should be followed, as it will
determine whether the priority rules of the Convention or
the national law apply to object-related associated rights.
Conclusion
The Convention addresses the perfection and priority of
competing interests in associated rights (and their related
international interests) to the extent that (1) the contract
under which the associated rights arise states that they are
secured by or associated with the relevant aircraft object
and (2) the associated rights are object-related. Assuming
that the relevant connecting factors are present and that
the requirements of the Convention are met, including
the proper registration of an international interest and
assignment thereof at the international registry, a pledgee
of aircraft lease chattel paper derives no additional benefit
from holding the chattel paper. In fact, such a secured party
would be well advised to not rely on its possession of tangible
chattel paper to ensure the priority of its interest and to
register an assignment of international interest (covering
the assignment of associated rights) with the international
registry established under the Convention.
Originally published in Pillsbury’s Transporation Finance
Digest, February 2013.
1. All references to the New York Uniform
Commercial Code as in eect on January 1, 2013.
2. UCC 9-330.
3. UCC 9-102(a)(11).
4. Electronic Chattel Paper: Invitation Accepted,
46, Gonz. L. Rev. 407 (2010-2011) at 412. At the
time, commercial lenders and financing agencies
typically purchased or perfected security in loan
and lease receivables by taking possession of the
underlying loan or lease agreement. This practice
fell short of creating a “negotiable instrument,” such
as a promissory note, which provides the holder (or
bearer) of the paper with an ownership interest in
the rights described therein. In order to preserve
the chattel paper financing market, the drafters
created a lower evidential threshold for chattel paper
financiers to meet.
5. UCC 9-330.
6. UCC 9-312.
7. It is important to emphasize that under UCC 9-330,
the good faith purchaser in possession takes chattel
paper free and clear of registered interests unless
it has actual knowledge of that registered interest.
UCC rule 9-330 does not impute knowledge or create
a duty to search any registry or make any inquiry,
whether or not such a search or inquiry would be
prudent or otherwise commercially reasonable.
Therefore, the existence of a public registration
made in accordance with the Convention would not
by itself, in the application of UCC 9-330, alter the
outcome.
8. UCC 9-330(c)(2), Ocial Commentary No. 9.
9. UCC 9-330(c), Ocial Commentary No. 11. Any
lender exercising remedies in this case would only
be entitled to recover the discounted present value
of the right to use the aircraft during the term of the
lease, with an obligation to account to the owner of
the equipment or the party with a separate security
interest in the equipment, as applicable.
10. In 1999, the UCC was revised to contemplate a
system for electronic chattel paper. 13 years later, the
markets have yet to adopt a common platform and
market practice surrounding electronic chattel paper.
Electronic Chattel Paper: Invitation Accepted, 46,
Gonz. L. Rev. 407 (2010-2011)
11. See Sir Roy Goode, Ocial Commentary (Unidroit
rev. ed. 2008) at paragraphs 2.7 and 2.15.
12. Article 31(1) and Article 32(1) of the Convention.
13. Article 32(2) of the Convention.
14. 49 U.S.C.
15. 462 U.S. 406, 103 S.Ct. 2476, 76 L.Ed.2d 678
(1983). The facts of this case are as follows: A
corporation operated by Roger Smith sold a plane
to the Shackets. The Shackets paid the sale price
and took possession of the plane. Smith gave the
Shackets only photocopies of the original bills of sale
reflecting the chain of title to the plane, and assured
them that he would take care of the paperwork,
which the Shackets understood to include the FAA
registrations. Smith did not file the title documents
with the FAA, but purported to sell the same plane
to Philko Aviation and provided Philko Aviation
with the original title documents. Philko Aviation
subsequently recorded the original title documents
with the FAA. After the fraud became apparent, the
Shackets filed a declaratory judgment action to
determine title to the plane. The Supreme Court
found in favor of Philko Aviation and clearly stated
that the recordation of an interest with the FAA is
required for perfection of a security interest and
that the failure to register the interest with the FAA
invalidates the conveyance as to innocent third
parties.
16. Ibid. at para. 8.
17. In a typical US law financing, financiers will still
file a UCC-1 financing statement because it is not
clear to what extent the definition of “aircraft” in
the Act preempts interests in related items, such as
spare parts, engines, records and proceeds. While
it could be beneficial to further limit the number of
overlapping security filings, the issue has not been
clarified in the courts probably due to the diligence of
financing parties in filing with the UCC.
18. See Aircraft Trading and Services, Inc. v. Brani,
Inc. 819 F.2d 1227, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 6730, 3
U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 1297; see also In
re: Air Vermont, Inc. and North Atlantic Airlines,
Inc.; Comair, Inc. v. Air Vermont, Inc. 45 B.R. 820;
1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21660; 39 U.C.C. Rep. Serv.
(Callaghan) 1452; see also Southern Air Transport,
Inc. v. Northwings Accessories Corp. 255 B.R. 715;
2000 Bankr. LEXIS 1422; see also Triad International
Maintenance Corp. v. Southern Air Transport,
Inc. 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33691; see also In re:
AE Liquidation, Inc. v. Eclipse Aerospace, Inc. 44
B.R. 509; 2011 Bankr. LEXIS 599; 54 Bankr. LEXIS
599; 54 Bankr. Ct. Dec. 105. 19. Article 29(1) of the
Convention. See also Goode, at paragraph 2.103. In
particular, a registered international interest has
priority over (a) a domestic interest which is neither
registered under the Convention (either because it is
of a kind not capable of registration or is given by a
debtor not situated in a Contracting State at the time
of the agreement and it does not relate to an airframe
or helicopter registered in a Contracting State—see
Goode, paragraphs 2.18(s)—2.20) nor covered by
a declaration under Article 39 and (b) a national
interest notice of which is not so registered.
20. See Goode, at paragraph 2.114.
21. As discussed above, this is not the case for a
promissory note, which does not create an interest in
an aircraft object.
22. Article 36(1) and (2) of the Convention.
23. See Goode, at paragraph 2.143. “This is to deal
with the situation where, for example, an agreement
secures not only the obligations for which it provides
but obligations arising under a later agreement and
the later agreement does not refer to the security, so
that a subsequent assignee of the associated rights
under the later agreement has no way of knowing
that the obligations under the later agreement
are secured on or in any way connected with the
equipment and ought not, therefore, to be subject to
the Convention priority rules.”
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
107
Local Counsel Explanatory Notes
If there is an asterisk (*) next to the country name on the one-page summary, it means that
local counsel for that country has provided additional explanatory notes to accompany some
of its answers to the jurisdictional questionnaire. Please be sure to read these notes together
with the material in the one-page summary, and please note that the question references tie
to the form of jurisdictional questionnaire which appears on pages 149-155.
Country /
Jurisdiction
Comments
Aruba
Generally. Under Aruba law there are two types of security interests that can apply to aircraft.
Accordingly, the term “mortgage”, when referred to in relation to Aruba, should be taken to mean
both a mortgage and a right of rst pledge. The latter form of security interest is more exible and
ecient.
Australia
Insolvency: Insolvency moratorium (question 2(d)). A transaction may be structured to take
the benet of certain provisions modifying the eect of the moratorium. Also, the Cape Town
Convention applies with eect from 1 September 2015.
Insolvency: Overreaching of the lessee’s insolvency estate (question 2(e)). In conjunction with
the CTC (Alternative A, 60 calendar days), after a waiting period, the insolvency administrator may
continue the lease by paying rent and other amounts attributable to the use and possession of the
aircraft.
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a)). If the owner is not an Australian citizen, the
registered operator must be an Australian citizen. Certain other eligibility criteria apply.
Registration: Convenience of registration (question 3(d)). We are not aware of CASA having
entered into an article 83bis agreement as this requires CASA to publish a notice in a gazette.
However we are aware of aircraft in NZ and USA regularly stationed in Australia
Export: Export licenses and permits (question 5(c)). This assumes applicable requirements to
operate an aircraft under safety laws and regulations (including ight permits) have been obtained.
Belgium
Generally: Belgian law does not currently recognize consensual non-possessory security interests
over moveable property, such as aircraft. While it is sometimes possible to structure a transaction
using a Belgian law governed “pledge” this is a possessory form of security interest and because
physical possession cannot remain with the pledgor, but can be with a third party such as a lessee,
this can lead to diculties. Although the law was changed in this regards, the executive measures
have not been taken yet.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
108
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Bermuda
Judgments / Arbitration: Enforceability of judgments (question 6(a)): As a matter of Bermuda
law, the courts of Bermuda would recognize as a valid judgment, a nal and conclusive judgment
in personam obtained in a New York state or US federal court sitting in New York against a
Bermuda company based upon the relevant documents under which a sum of money is payable
(other than a sum of money payable in respect of multiple damages, taxes or other charges of
a like nature or in respect of a ne or other penalty) and would give a judgment based thereon
provided that (a) such courts had proper jurisdiction over the parties subject to such judgment;
(b) such courts did not contravene the rules of natural justice of Bermuda; (c) such judgment was
not obtained by fraud; (d) the enforcement of the judgment would not be contrary to the public
policy of Bermuda; (e) no new admissible evidence relevant to the action is submitted prior to the
rendering of the judgment by the courts of Bermuda; and (f) there is due compliance with the
correct procedures under the laws of Bermuda.
Brazil
Repossession: Legal costs of repossession (question 1(f)): Local costs for repossession could be
equal or less than USD $50,000 in most cases, however this will depend on a number of factors,
including the exact location of the aircraft. A sum between USD $35,000 and USD $75,000 would
be more accurate.
Bulgaria
Repossession: Taxes and fees (question 1 (d)). Signicant, because the fees are based on 2% of
the value, but not less than BGN 25 (approx. EUR 12.5).
Repossession: Speed of repossession (question 1 (e)). The term also includes the time for the
second (appeal) and third (cassation) instances.
Repossession: Legal cost of repossession (question 1 (f)). The court fees may vary from to 2
to 8% of the value of the property (in all instances) and therefore the costs may be above US$
1,000,000.
Export: Export licenses / permits (question 5 (c)). Export Certicate of Airworthiness
Canada
Generally. The answers to the questionnaire as reected in this publication apply also to
the following jurisdictions: the Provinces of Quebec, British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba,
Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland & Labrador, Prince Edward Island and
the Territories of Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut, in addition to the Province of Ontario
and the federal laws of Canada.
Registration: Registration of additional interests (question 3(b)). The Canadian Civil Aircraft
Register is an operator only register. International interests under the Cape Town Convention are
noted in the International Registry. Interests in aircraft objects to which the Cape Town Convention
does not apply may be perfected under each province’s Personal Property Security Act (PPSA) (or,
in the case of Quebec, The Civil Code of Quebec).
Cayman Islands
Insolvency: Insolvency moratorium (question 2(c)): For the avoidance of doubt, the rule in
Cayman Islands liquidations is that no claim may be commenced or proceeded with against a
company in compulsory liquidation without the leave of the Court.
Preferential Liens: Unusual or onerous preferential liens (question 7(b)): Cayman Islands law
provides for liens in favour of the Civil Aviation Authority and in favour of the Airports Authority
in each case for the recovery of fees and charges owed to such authority and does not stipulate
whether such lien is with respect only to the aircraft to which such fees and charges relate or to
any aircraft operated by the person that owes such fees or charges.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
109
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
China
Repossession: Speed of repossession and legal cost of repossession (questions 1(e) and 1(f)).
The responses were given after considering the corresponding declarations made by PRC to Article
13 of the Cape Town Convention, which requires a PRC court to make a court order within 10
calendar days and to enforce such order immediately.
Insolvency: Insolvency moratorium (questions 2(c) and 2(d)). Answers were chosen after consid-
ering the corresponding declarations made by PRC to Article XI of the Protocol, which provides for
a waiting period of 60 calendar days;
Deregistration: Third party rights to deregister (questions 4(a) and 4(b)). The response provided
relates to an instance whereby either an owner/lessor or a mortgagee were to apply to the CAAC
for deregistration of an aircraft using an IDERA, pursuant to the relevant CAAC regulations.
Export: Expert licenses/permits (question 5(c)). As a matter of procedure, conrmation from
the Airworthiness Department of the CAAC as to the airworthiness of the aircraft for a ferry ight
would be required as a condition to export.
Costa Rica
Repossession: Self-help remedies (mortgagee) (question 1(b)). In order for a mortgagee to
repossess using self-help, the owner-debtor must have consented to such remedy in the mortgage
document(s).
Czech Republic
Repossession: Self-help remedies (question 1(a) and (b)). Self-help test: (i) protected rights are
endangered and (ii) public authority action would come too late.
Preferential Liens (question 7 (a)). Preferential possessory liens are well recognized.
Denmark
Preferential Liens: Unusual or onerous preferential liens (question 7(c)). By general applicable
law, lessee may have a right of retention over the aircraft for a valid claim under the lease against
the owner-lessor. However, it will often be agreed in the lease that the lessee does not have such
right.
Dominican
Republic
Insolvency: Sophistication of insolvency laws (question 2(a)). A new suite of insolvency laws
were only recently approved by Congress. Accordingly, their application and interpretation remain
subject to judicial development.
El Salvador
Generally. In El Salvador there are no precedents of repossession and bankruptcy remains
uncommon.
Repossession: Legal cost of repossession (question 1(f)). The estimation of legal fees will be
determined depending on each case.
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a)). Registration of aircraft in El Salvador is
reserved only for aircraft with a Salvadoran license.
Registration: Convenience of registration (question 3(b)). Mortgages over aircraft can be
registered in El Salvador only with respect to aircraft with a Salvadoran license.
Estonia
Export (question 5(a) to (d)). The answer relates to the export of civil aircraft to non-EU countries.
Separate regimes apply on military aircraft and intra-EU trade.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
110
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Fiji
Repossession: Speed of repossession (question 1(e)). The judicial system in the case of a
contested insolvency may take years to issue a decision.
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(b)). Strictly, local legislation does not permit
registration of mortgagee interests. However the local Registry, as a matter of practice, will note a
mortgagee’s interest on the Register.
Finland
Repossession: Judicial proceedings: requirement for a deposit, bond or other security
(question 1(c)). If precautionary measures are applied, a deposit is required by the enforcement
agency. However, in an action for declaratory judgment a deposit is not required but this process is
a much longer one.
Insolvency: Insolvency moratorium (question 2(d)). Finland has not ratied the Cape Town
Convention.
Judgments / Arbitration: Enforceability of judgments (question 6(b)). “Yes” now but will be
subject to the outcome of “Brexit.”
France, French
Polynesia and
New Caledonia
Repossession: Speed of repossession (question 1(e)). I assumed that the lease was terminated
and that a New York or English judgment has been entered before the lessee’s judgment of
bankruptcy or before the lessee is protected by a judgment of judicial safeguard.
Germany
Repossession: Legal cost of repossession (question 1(f)). Lawyers’ legal fees in Germany are
governed by statutory law which provides for graduated fees based on the value of the matter
(maximum value in repossession proceedings: total amount of lease rentals for one year). The
answer to question 1 (f) on the estimated legal cost of repossession is based on the hypothetical
total amount of lease rentals for one year of US$ 9 million. Based on this amount, the hypothetical
statutory legal fees would amount to approximately US$ 11,250 where the proceedings are
contested. Depending on the specic circumstances lawyers may require the conclusion of a fee
agreement for higher fees, but the legal costs for obtaining a court order for repossession may still
be less than or equal to US$ 50,000.
Guernsey
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a) and (b)). Responses to Box 3 (a) and (b) must
be read in conjunction with the overriding requirement that a person must be a Qualied Person
to hold a legal or benecial interest in a registered aircraft. The following persons are eligible to
register on the Guernsey Aircraft Registry: (a) The Crown; (b) Natural persons who are (i) Nationals
of any EEA State, (ii) Resident in the British Islands, (iii) Resident in a British Overseas Territory, or
(iv) Represented by a resident agent; (c) Legal persons which (i) are a business in Appendix C to
the Handbook for Prescribed Businesses on Countering Financial Crime and Terrorist Financing
issued by the Guernsey Financial Services Commission or (ii) represented by a resident agent or (iii)
any other person, at the discretion of the Registrar, subject to whatever additional requirements he
may impose.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
111
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Hong Kong
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a)). Provided that the operator OR the owner is
a “qualied person” under the Hong Kong Air Navigation Order 1995 (Ch. 448C) AND the operator
is also registered as a charterer by demise. “Qualied persons” include the government of Hong
Kong or the PRC, Chinese Citizens, permanent resident of Hong Kong and bodies incorporated in or
under the law of Hong Kong or other parts of the PRC and having their principal business in Hong
Kong or other parts of the PRC.
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(b)(2)). There is no register of aircraft mortgages,
but an aircraft mortgage needs to be registered at the Hong Kong Company Registry to the extent
that the mortgagor is a company incorporated in Hong Kong or having a place of business in Hong
Kong.
Deregistration: Third party deregistration rights (question 4(a)). Yes, provided that the owner-
Lessor is a “qualied person” (see foregoing note 3 (a)).
Deregistration: Third party deregistration rights (question 4(b)). Yes, so long as the mortgagee is
the qualied person in which name the aircraft is registered.
Export: Third party export rights – mortgagee (question 5(b)). Yes, so long as the mortgagee is
the qualied person in which name the aircraft is registered.
Judgments/Arbitration: Enforceability of judgments (question 6(a)). A judgement rendered
by a New York state or U.S. federal court sitting in New York or by an English court cannot be
recognized and enforced in Hong Kong through a process of registration of judgments allowed
for certain other countries designated by the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement)
Ordinance (Cap. 319) of Hong Kong but have recourse under common law, provided that inter alia
(i) proceedings are commenced by writ before the Hong Kong courts; (ii) the foreign judgment is a
proof of a valid debt (not being a sum payable in respect of taxes or other charges of a like nature
or in respect or a ne or other penalty) which can be sued upon and is nal and conclusive; and (iii)
a judgment that recognizes the foreign judgment is given directly by the Hong Kong courts, which
judgment can be later enforced like any other Hong Kong judgment. We have rendered a “YES”
answer to this question as the aforementioned requirement that Hong Kong courts scrutinize the
foreign judgment as to whether it is a proof of a valid debt does not seem to exceed the “permitted
threshold conditions” (as set out on page 154 (Appendix, Box 6 (Judgments/Arbitration) of this
question in a substantive appreciable manner.
Indonesia
Insolvency: (question 2). Indonesia adopts “Alternative A” in its entirety to all types of insolvency
proceedings, and the waiting period shall be sixty (60) calendar days. At the earlier of the end of
the waiting period, the insolvency ocer shall give possession of the Aircraft to the lessor in any
insolvency-related event. Compared to general insolvency proceedings, the application of a sixty
(60) calendar day waiting period is more benecial to the lessor.
Israel
Repossession: Self-help remedies (question 1(a)). Self-help, when permissible, can only be
exercised within the time frame provided by law and only with reasonable force.
Preferential Liens: Unusual or onerous liens (question 7(a)). A repairer/mechanic/hangar-
keeper lien may subsist only as long as the aircraft is in the possession of the repairer/mechanic/
hangar-keeper.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
112
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Japan
Repossession: Taxes and fees (question 1(d)). Ad valorem taxes are paid upon the full registration
of a mortgage as a percentage of the value of the mortgage. Market practice has developed
to allow for a provisional mortgage registration to be made on payment of a nominal amount in
order to secure priority for the mortgagee. If the mortgage becomes enforceable, the provisional
registration of the mortgage will need to be converted to a full registration and the necessary ad
valorem taxes paid at such time before approaching the court for an enforcement order.
Insolvency: Insolvency moratorium (questions 2(c) and (d)). No moratorium period applies in the
case of bankruptcy proceedings. A moratorium may apply in the case of corporate reorganisation
proceedings and the period of such moratorium is determined by the (mandatorily appointed)
reorganisation trustee in its discretion.
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a)). The Japanese registry is an owner registry
and only a Japanese individual or corporate entity may be registered as the owner of an aircraft.
Registration: Convenience of registration (question 3(c)). There is no system for registering a
lease in Japan. If a foreign owner wants to register an aircraft in Japan it will need to do so by
selling the aircraft to a Japanese entity and entering into contractual arrangements whereby
all ownership rights are transferred back to the foreign owner pursuant to a conditional sale
agreement. The foreign owner will often take a Japanese mortgage with provisional registration
over the aircraft in order to secure its rights under the conditional sale agreement. Any foreign
mortgagee will need to notarize its signatures and supporting documents before it can complete a
provisional registration of the mortgage in Japan.
Deregistration: Third party rights to deregister (questions 4(a) and (b)). Only the registered
owner can deregister the Aircraft. An owner can deregister an aircraft acting alone provided it
has the necessary documents which includes the certicate of registration. Although the consent
of the airline is not required for deregistration, Article 59 of the Civil Aeronautics Act requires that
the certicate of registration is kept on the aircraft and therefore an uncooperative airline could in
practice prevent deregistration.
Deregistration: Convenience of deregistration (question 4(d)). There is no need for the Japanese
registered owner to notarise or authenticate any documents led on deregistration. However, if
a mortgage is also to be removed from the register and the mortgagee is a foreign entity, any
documents signed by the foreign mortgagee must be notarised and translated.
Export: Export licenses/permits (question 5(c)). An export permit must be obtained from the
Director-General of Customs.
Export: Taxes and fees (question 5(d)). The taxes or fees imposed on export of the aircraft depend on
the country to which the aircraft is being exported and are typically imposed by that country not Japan.
Preferential liens: Unusual or onerous preferential liens (question 7(a)). Please note that the
holder of a possessory lien (as opposed to a non-possessory lien) has the right to sell the aircraft
through the courts by public auction. Examples of such possessory liens include those arising in
favour of an airport administration for unpaid landing charges (although there is no precedent for
this particular kind of lien) or in favour of a maintenance provider for unpaid maintenance fees.
Jersey
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a) and (b)). Responses to Box 3 (a) and (b) must
be read in conjunction with the overriding requirement that a person must be a Qualied Person to
hold a legal or benecial interest in a registered aircraft. A Qualied Person is a body incorporated
or undertaking established in, or a citizen or resident of, one of the following jurisdictions: Jersey,
Guernsey, Isle of Man, Switzerland, a Commonwealth country, or a European Economic Area
country.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
113
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Jordan
Insolvency: (question 2). Prior to the ratication of the Cape Town Convention, Jordanian laws
prohibited the exercise of “self-help” remedies. Given Jordan’s declaration under Article 54(2)
whereby Jordan has declared that the exercise of self-help remedies under the Convention and
Protocol are available to creditors, and in light of Articles 8 and 10 of the Convention and Article
IX of the Protocol, this has been overturned specically in relation to aircraft. Notwithstanding this
declaration, we believe that, from a practical perspective, it would be very dicult for a creditor to
exercise a self-help remedy in relation to its interest over an aircraft that is located in a Jordanian
airport/hangar, and the creditor may be forced to obtain a court order to attach and ground the
aircraft and commence legal proceedings to exercise any of its remedies under the Convention
and Protocol. Moreover, there are no precedents on the application and interpretation of the
Convention or the Protocol.
Kenya
Repossession: Legal cost of repossession (question 1(f)). Advocates’ legal fees are guided by
the Advocates Remuneration Order 2014 (Legal Notice No. 35) which provides for graduated fees
(minimum fees chargeable) based on the value of the matter. By way of illustration, the statutory
legal fees chargeable for seeking a court order for repossession of an aircraft with a hypothetical
value of US$ 80 million would be approximately US$ 1.3 million where the proceedings are
contested.
Registration: Convenience of registration (question 3(c)). The ocial language of Kenya is
English. The Kenya Civil Aviation Authority provides no mandatory requirement for documents to
be led with it to be translated into English, however, in order to ascertain the ownership or which
party has operational control of an aircraft, an English translation of the indicative document
should be submitted.
Korea
Insolvency: Insolvency moratorium (question 2(c)). In rehabilitation proceedings, if the receiver
elects to perform the lease, the lessee will continue to possess the aircraft so long as it thenceforth
performs the lease in accordance with its terms.
Lithuania
Repossession: Taxes and fees (question 1(d)). If litigation on the merits of the case is stated in
Lithuanian courts, then the court fees may exceed USD 1,000 depending on the type of the claim.
Macau
Generally: The answers to the questions are given on a general basis and do not intend to address
any specic issues. Furthermore, the answers do not represent an exhaustive analysis of Macau
law or of any specic case.
Interested parties should request separate legal advice for any particular concern as the answers
may dier on a case-by-case basis depending on the circumstances and details of each case.
On a nal note, the solution to each question depends on the existence of a repossession/
deregistration power of attorney and the powers granted thereunder.
Mexico
Export: Signicant taxes and fees (question 5(d)). Applicable taxes and fees would be subject to
the importation regime with which the aircraft was introduced into Mexican Territory.
Judgments / Arbitration: Enforceability of judgments (questions 6(a) and (b)). Whilst a foreign
judgment would not be subject to any additional requirements other that certain threshold
conditions, the judicial process to homologate a foreign judgment is highly complicated and not
recommended.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
114
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Netherlands
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a)). The registration of a leased aircraft must refer
to the owner as well as to the operator.
Registration: Convenience of registration (question 3(c)). If the aircraft is to be registered in the
ownership/mortgage register (which is not mandatory unless the aircraft is to be made subject to a
mortgage) notarized/authenticated documents will be required.
Deregistration: (question 4). For deregistration the original certicate of registration must be
submitted. Dutch CAA will in practice cooperate if it is demonstrated that the lessee is no longer
entitled to possess and operate the aircraft.
Export: Lessee/debtor cooperation (question 5(b)). This assumes that under applicable law
the deregistration and export power of attorney is valid and will not terminate upon the owner’s
insolvency.
Preferential Liens: Unusual or onerous preferential liens (question 7(a)). Dutch law does provide
for non-consensual or preferential liens for repairmen/mechanics, but only as long as the aircraft is
in their possession.
New Zealand
Judgments/Arbitration: Enforceability of judgments (questions 6(a) and (b)). We have answered
“YES” to these questions on the assumption that, while additional conditions in addition to the
“threshold conditions” do exist (see Methodology and Interpretation of Results section for more
details as to what these are), these are assumed to be not suciently signicant to render a “NO”
answer. In the case of a judgment rendered by an English court, it would be enforceable under the
Reciprocal Enforcement of Judgments Act 1934 and the following extra conditions would apply:
(1) it must not be in respect of taxes or similar charges or a ne or other penalty; (2) it must be
enforceable in England; (3) it must not have been wholly satised; (4) the defendant must have had
sucient notice of the proceedings to enable him to appear; and (5) the rights under the judgment
must be vested in the applicant. In the case of a judgment rendered by a New York court, it would
be enforced at common law (usually by way of summary judgment) and additional condition (1)
above would also apply. It would be a further defense to an enforcement action that the judgment
was obtained in breach of natural justice.
Nigeria
Repossession: Taxes and fees (question 1(d)). Stamp duty (at a nominal rate) is payable as
condition to admitting documents in evidence for the purpose of a repossession.
Repossession: Legal cost of repossession (question 1(f)). Legal costs may vary due to certain
factors such as time spent by counsel, the state of the court’s list, the amount of documentation
which are relevant to the matter, the caliber of counsel and the length of time for trial.
Deregistration: Convenience of deregistration (question 4(d)). The NCAA will require the trans-
lation of any document which is not in English.
Preferential Liens: Unusual or onerous preferential liens (question 7(b)). Nigerian courts will
likely, should the need arise, make reference to persuasive English authorities.
Norway
Generally: Norway has adopted the Cape Town Convention and aircraft protocol, and will respect
an IDERA registered in the Norwegian Civil Aviation Registry. A mortgagee must rely on a regis-
tered IDERA in order to be able to unilaterally request the aircraft to be deregistered, without the
cooperation of the registered owner.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
115
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Pakistan
Preferential Liens: Unusual or onerous preferential liens (question 7(a) and 7(b)). The
answers in the questionnaire are predicated upon the assumptions set out in the questions. For
example for question 7(a), the laws of Pakistan do not recognize any non-consensual preferential
non-possessory liens over aircraft in favor of a repairer/mechanic/landlord/hangar-keeper. However
under Pakistan law, there are two categories of priority non-consensual rights: (i) claims against
aircraft which may be enforced by an action in rem under the relevant provisions of the Admiralty
Jurisdiction of the High Courts Ordinance, 1980; and (ii) where there are unpaid taxes or other
public dues directly related to the use of that Aircraft and owed by the Owner of that Aircraft.
Similarly, for question 7(b), our law does not recognize “eet-wide” liens however under the
Implementation Rules (which incorporates CTC into our domestic law), any person including a state
entity with the requisite powers can arrest/detain an aircraft for violation of law or for payment of
any amount owed and directly relating to the services pertaining to that aircraft.
Papua New
Guinea
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(b)): The Personal Property Security Act 2011
commenced in operation on May 9, 2016, one of the most signicant pieces of legislative reform
for the Papua New Guinea nance sector and commerce generally. Security holders can submit
a notication of pre-existing and newly created security interests granted by corporations and
individuals in relation to personal property situated in Papua New Guinea (and security interests
governed by Papua New Guinea law).
Poland
Registration: Convenience of registration (question 3(c)). The applicable legal provisions require
that documents be notarized and/or authenticated, however in practice the aviation authority
tends to accept simple copies of any presented documents.
Deregistration: Convenience of deregistration (question 4(d)). The applicable legal provisions
require that documents be notarized and/or authenticated, however in practice the aviation
authority tends to accept simple copies of any presented documents.
Export: Export licenses/permits (question 5(c)). An Export Certicate of Airworthiness may be
required. For the purposes of the questionnaire, we do not consider this to constitute an export
license or permit or any other restriction on the ability to export the aircraft.
Export: Taxes and fees (question 5(d)). Provided that the owner-lessor does not conduct business
operations in Poland through a permanent establishment and that it is not obliged to register in
Poland for VAT purposes.
South Africa
Insolvency: Insolvency moratorium (question 2(c)): There is no formal moratorium period in
liquidation proceedings. The period inserted relates to the period within which the liquidator would
reasonably be required to exercise his election as to whether or not to cancel the lease.
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(b)). The registration of the aircraft will confer
“legal ownership” of the aircraft on the name of the registered party as a matter of South African
law. There is currently no ling allowed to recognise the rights of the true legal owner of the
aircraft under the regulations of the South African Aviation Authority.
Deregistration: Third party rights to deregister (questions 4(a) and 4(b)) and Precedent of
refusing to deregister (question 4(c)). The answers here reect the bald legal and administrative
position but there is no or very little evidence that the South African Aviation Authority will in
practice comply with the exercise of these rights absent a court order.
Export: Lessee/debtor cooperation (questions 5(a) and (b)). Whilst the exercise of these rights
may be technically possible we have assumed that the non-co-operation of the Lessee will
comprise a major obstacle.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
116
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Switzerland
Repossession: Speed of repossession (question 1(e)). Our answer relates to proceedings up to
the rst instance decision, being specied that if all appeals are made, judiciary proceedings may
take up to several years. Please note that the duration of court proceedings is dicult to assess
as there is no applicable statutory period and may vary depending in particular on the applicable
canton and the complexity of the concrete case.
Repossession: Legal cost of repossession (question 1(f)). The cost of proceedings may be less
than we estimated, in particular (1) in the event of repossession by an owner-lessor and/or (2) in
the event of repossession by a mortgagee where the contractual situation is clear and the debtor
has no ground to challenge the validity of the secured obligations and/or of the security interest.
Taiwan
(Republic of China)
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a)(2)): Assumes owner is domiciled outside
Taiwan. If owner domiciled in Taiwan, registration in the name of the owner is permitted.
Registration: Convenience of registration (question 3(c)); and Deregistration: Convenience of
deregistration (question 4(d)): Checked yes solely because translation is required.
Export: Lessee/debtor cooperation (questions 5(a) and 5(b); Export: Export licenses/permits
(question 5(c)): Assumes airworthiness certicate and aviation approvals have been obtained.
United Kingdom
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(a)). There is nothing in the Air Navigation Order
2009 (SI 2009/3015) prohibiting registration of an aircraft in the name of the owner in circum-
stances where the aircraft is leased or chartered to another party who is the operator; however, it
has become clear following discussions with the U.K. Civil Aviation Authority (“CAA”) that it would
be reluctant to allow such an arrangement, strongly preferring the aircraft to be registered in the
name of the operator wherever possible.
Registration: Aircraft register type (question 3(b)). While there is no register to which the public
have access recording or noting the identity of the legal owner, the application to register an
aircraft requires the legal owner, if not the registrant, to be identied to the CAA who will keep a
note of this on (private) record.
Deregistration: Third party rights to deregister (questions 4(a) and 4(b)). The U.K. has adopted
the Cape Town Convention and Aircraft Protocol and an IDERA registered with the CAA will be
honoured provided the correct forms are submitted to the CAA. The CAA will not countersign any
IDERA but will conrm acceptance of the IDERA by email or letter to the registered owner and
the authorised party. If an owner-lessor requests the deregistration of an aircraft which is subject
to a mortgage, then the mortgage must be discharged or the consent of the mortgagee must be
obtained before such deregistration can occur.
Export: Lessee/debtor cooperation (question 5(b)). A mortgagee does not need the consent of
the registered owner or any other party on the CAA’s registration records in order to rely on a regis-
tered IDERA in order to be able to unilaterally request the aircraft to be deregistered and exported.
Export: Export licenses/permits (question 5(c)). An Export Certicate of Airworthiness may be
required. For the purposes of the jurisdictional questionnaire, we do not consider this to constitute
an export license or permit or any other restriction on the ability to export the aircraft.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
117
LOCAL COUNSEL EXPLANATORY NOTES
Judgments/Arbitration: Enforceability of judgments (question 6(a)): While there is no automatic
recognition of New York judgments under English law, where the judgment in question is an order
for a sum of money, other than judgments in respect of taxes or similar charges or a ne or other
penalty, common law allows the judgment creditor to sue on the judgment for payment as if it
were any other debt (usually by way of summary judgment). In practice, such a process will often
amount to de facto recognition and enforcement without re-examination on the merits.
Preferential Liens: Government requisition and conscation (question 7(d)). While requisition
compensation is payable in the United Kingdom in the circumstances described, the degree to
which such compensation may be viewed as “reasonable” will be determined by the government.
United States
Repossession: Requirement for a deposit, bond or other security (question 1(c)). No such
deposit or bond would be required for a post judgment remedy, but would likely be required for any
remedy sought pre-judgment.
Insolvency: Insolvency moratorium (question 2(c)). It is possible that the moratorium period
may be extended in circumstances where the insolvent/bankrupt debtor has cured all payment
and other defaults within the initial period (other than those defaults constituted by the ling of
bankruptcy proceedings) and no further such default occurs.
Preferential Liens: Unusual or onerous preferential liens (questions 7(a) and 7(b)). For a
mechanic’s lien, New York law does provide that the lien remains attached for a 30 day period
following the lienholder relinquishing possession, although it is uncertain whether its preferential
status would continue during such period.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
118
Score
100%
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
Color
RUSSIA
AUSTRIA
HUNGARY
SLOVENIA
SWITZERLAND
ROMANIA
FRANCE
BULGARIA
CZECH
REPUBLIC
UKRAINE
DENMARK
ESTONIA
LATVIA
LITHUANIA
GERMANY
POLAND
GUERNSEY
JERSEY
I TA LY
FINLAND
NORWAY
BELGIUM
AZERBAIJAN
ISRAEL
OMAN
UNITED ARAB
EMIRATES
LEBANON
TURKEY
JORDAN
KENYA
RWANDA
NIGERIA
MOZAMBIQUE
NAMIBIA
SOUTH
AFRICA
MAURITIUS
INDIA
SRI LANKA
PAKISTAN
CHINA
MYANMAR
KOREA
AUSTRALIA
FIJI
ARUBA
COSTA
RICA
FRENCH
POLYNESIA
EL SALVADOR
GUATEMALA
BRAZIL
PERU
CAYMAN
ISLANDS
DOMINICAN
REPUBLIC
BERMUDA
MEXICO
EGYPT
CANADA
UNITED STATES
NETHERLANDS
UNITED
KINGDOM
IRELAND
PORTUGAL
HONG KONG
TAIWAN
MACAU
VIETNAM
MALAYSIA
INDONESIA
PAPIA NEW
GUINEA
NEW
CALEDONIA
NEW
ZEALAND
World Map
This world map summarizes the overall scores and asset recoverability ratings for each jurisdiction. The
green, yellow and red colorings represent jurisdictions whose asset recoverability ratings are “LOWER,”
“MODERATE,” or “HIGHER” risk respectively with the ner gradient of the color indicating whether the
jurisdiction sits of the top, middle or bottom range of that category.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
120
About the Contributors
Pillsbury gratefully acknowledges and would like to thank all of the contributors in each juris-
diction listed below for dedicating their time, free of charge, to make this publication possible.
GOMEZ & BIKKER
Lincoln D. Gomez is a partner of Gomez & Bikker. His corporate law practice is concentrated in
the areas of aircraft title, registration, financing and leasing and related matters. He is also a guest
lecturer at the Universiteit van Aruba on Aviation Registration and Aviation Finance Law. His
clients and peers refer to him as “the Aruba Guy” for finding creative solutions to complex legal
issues in Aruba. He authors an aircraft registration and aviation blog: www.lincolngomez.com.
Lincoln holds degrees in International Tax & Financial Services from Thomas Jeerson School
of Law, a law degree from the Universiteit van Aruba and undergraduate degrees in Sciences from
Saint Leo University. He is past President of the Aruba Bar Association.
Patrick Honnebier is one of the few legal professionals having both a long-standing academic
background and a vast practical expertise in respect to international aviation finance and lease
transactions. He is Of Counsel at Gomez & Bikker Law Oces and based in Amsterdam. Patrick
advises major manufacturers, banks, lessors, private operators and airlines in relation to interna-
tional financing and leasing of aircraft, helicopters and engines. Currently, he lectures at the LL.M.
in Air and Space Law program of the University of Mississippi (Ole Miss), School of Law. He is
the responsible professor for the full Spring Semester module International Aviation Financing
and Leasing Laws. Worldwide, this course is the only one of its kind. Patrick also teaches mobile
equipment financing law at the Law Faculties of Utrecht University and Groningen University in
the Netherlands. Previously Patrick was, for ten years, responsible for the international aviation
financing law course at the International Institute of Air and Space Law, Leiden University. He
has also taught at the University of Aruba. He participated in the Diplomatic Conference for the
realization of the Convention on International Interest in Mobile Equipment and the Aircraft
Equipment Protocol in Cape Town, South Africa (2001). Patrick was the expert legal counsel of
the Governments of Aruba, the former Netherlands Antilles and the Dutch Ministry of Foreign
Aairs concerning the adoption by the Kingdom of the Netherlands of the Cape Town Convention
in 2010. He advises the Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, Department of Civil Aviation,
of the Netherlands in regard to aircraft repossession and deregistration cases arising in problematic
foreign jurisdictions. He is the author of numerous articles which are published in all the leading
air law journals. Frequently and worldwide he is a speaker at international aviation finance and
lease conferences.
KING & WOOD MALLESONS
John Canning is a partner in King & Wood Mallesons’ Sydney oce where he specializes in cross
border structured finance transactions. John is recommended as a leading individual in the area
of Aviation by The International Who’s Who of Aviation Lawyers and by The Best Lawyers in
Australia 2015. John has been involved in the design and implementation of the Personal Property
Securities Legislation (PPS) with the Attorney General’s Department and Senate Inquiries. John is
now advising clients on the impact of the PPS on their business and products. In Chambers Global
Guide John was described as “one of the leading practitioners in Australia and is well respected
on the aviation side.”
Aruba
Australia
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
121
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Tejaswi Nimmagadda is a Registered Foreign Lawyer (England & Wales) based in Hong Kong and
Counsel in the Banking and Finance department of King & Wood Mallesons’ Hong Kong oce, with
broad experience, covering Asset finance and leasing, infrastructure and project finance, corporate
and leveraged finance and securitization.
Tejaswi is experienced in all aspects of aircraft financing and leasing, including pre-delivery
payment financing, export credit agency supported financing, operating and finance leasing, sale
and lease backs, structured financing, portfolio acquisitions and sales, EETCs and portfolio securi-
tizations. He has regularly acted for financiers, lessors, owners, borrowers, issuers and airlines,
managers and operators.
In 2014-2015, Tejaswi was requested by the Australian government to assist with the implementation
of the Cape Town Convention in Australia.
BINDER GRÖSSWANG RECHTSANWÄLTE GMBH
Tibor Fabian has been a partner at Binder Grösswang since 1996. Prior to his professional career
as a lawyer, he worked as head of international project finance at Österreichische Länderbank
and as an assistant to the Chairman of Öesterreichische Kontrollbank. Tibor holds degrees from
the University of Economics and Business Administration in Vienna and the University of Vienna
Law School. His practice focuses mainly on banking and finance, structured finance, real estate
and property law.
Emanuel Welten joined Binder Grösswang in 2001 and was promoted to partner in 2009. He
specializes in finance, restructuring, banking law and aviation law. He has advised several financing
banks and lessors in relation to all aspects of aircraft financing, including the repossessing and
relocation of aircraft. Emanuel studied and worked in Vienna, Paris, Brussels and New York.
BM MORRISON PARTNERS
Delara Israfilova joined BM Morrison Partners in 2003 and is a partner of the firm as of 2013. She
specializes in finance, including project financing, employment, and general corporate matters.
She regularly advises foreign lenders on aircraft finance deals in Azerbaijan. Delara’s particular
experience includes pioneer transactions such as representing a foreign lender negotiating the
Emissions Reduction Purchase Agreement (ERPA) in Azerbaijan and its registration as a “project
participant” in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) contemplated by the Kyoto Protocol,
aircraft financing secured by local pledge, and Eurobond oerings.
Leyla Safarova joined BM Morrison Partners in 2013 as an associate. She specializes in taxation,
intellectual property, including licensing and general corporate matters. She regularly advises
foreign lenders on aircraft finance deals in Azerbaijan. Recently, she advised a US export credit
bank on an aircraft finance deal involving the national air carrier in Azerbaijan.
LVP LAW
Mia Wouters currently works as Of Counsel at the law firm LVP Law in the Brussels oce. She and
her team, solve problems and represent the interest of airlines and regional airports in all aspects
of their operations, from dealing with day to day contracts to managing the more complicated
relations with ground handlers, security and safety issues or setting up airlines in Belgium. She
works with regulators and represents loss adjusters and insurance companies in major accidents
and incidents. Her practice, supported by the finest lawyers in the field, also includes wet and dry
leasing, buying/selling and repossessing of aircraft and taking care of all the necessary formalities
Austria
Azerbaijan
Belgium
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
122
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
that go with it. In sum Mia is actively involved in the full range of legal issues arising in the aviation
and tourism industry. In 2009, Mia was appointed Professor at the University of Gent, Department
of European, Public and International Law where she gives courses in Air Transport Law. She is
a director of the European Aviation Club, and serves on the Committee of the UK based Royal
Aeronautical Society (RAeS) Brussels Branch. She is also past Chair of the Aviation Law Committee
of the International Bar Association (IBA). Mia is one of the founding members of the International
Aviation Women’s Association (IAWA) and a member of various air law associations. She served
as a judge on the European Nuclear Energy Tribunal in Paris under the OECD’s Nuclear Energy
Agency from 2006 until 2014. Besides regularly being requested as guest lecturer in aviation law
at dierent universities, Mia has addressed several conferences world-wide on air transportation
and has modestly published on aviation matters. She has also been involved in several reports
drawn up for the European Commission and was awarded numerous mentions as a leading aviation
expert in Belgium.
CONYERS DILL & PEARMAN
Julie McLean is a director in the Bermuda oce of Conyers Dill & Pearman and is global head of the
Aviation Finance team. Her practice covers asset finance with particular focus on aircraft finance
and registrations, as well as investment funds with particular focus on partnerships and private
equity. Julie advises investment banks, airlines, leasing companies and investment managers. Julie
regularly contributes to industry publications and is the author of the Bermuda chapter of Aircraft
Finance (Sweet & Maxwell) and the co-author, Bermuda chapter of Aircraft Liens and Detention
Rights (Sweet & Maxwell). Julie works closely with the Bermuda Department of Civil Aviation
and was an active participant in the industry group which worked with the Bermuda government
to draft and pass the necessary domestic legislation to allow the United Kingdom to extend the
Cape Town Convention to Bermuda (expected to be fairly imminent). She is recognized as a leader
in her industry by Legal 500 Caribbean (corporate and commercial), Who’s Who Legal (aviation/
transport), IFLR1000 and the Expert Guides: Women in Business Law (Aviation).
FELSBERG ADVOGADOS
João Paulo Servera is a partner at Felsberg the Head of the Aviation Practice. João Paulo “JP”
Servera focuses his practice on aviation and corporate law, particularly in aircraft financing, cross-
border transactions and in advising foreign clients with interest in Brazil, as well as Brazilians with
interest abroad. With Felsberg since May 2015, Mr. Servera leads the team fully dedicated to Aircraft
Financing and General Aviation. Mr. Servera has over a decade of experience in Aircraft Finance
transactions involving airlines, air service companies and corporate aircraft, primarily assisting
ECAs, Banks, Financiers, Lessors, Mortgagors and other creditors in securing assets in Brazil, as
well as borrowers, lessees and operators. Such practice brought to Mr. Servera significant experience
in aircraft related commercial litigation, mostly in cases of aircraft repossession and bankruptcy
and judicial reorganization. The assistance provided to airlines and air service companies and their
economical group ranges from the development of the company and/or group corporate structure
to counseling in several areas of the aviation industry, such as aircraft financing, corporate and
contractual law, corporate and tax planning and regulatory matters. Mr. Servera is a Member of
the Aviation Working Group – AWG and was directly involved in the implementation of the Cape
Town Convention in Brazil.
Bermuda
Brazil
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
123
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
BOYANOV & CO.
Raina Dimitrova is a partner at Boyanov & Co. and practices in the area of aircraft finance, and
leasing, as well as contract law, consumer protection, franchise, procurement, tourism, TMT and
other regulatory regimes. Previously, Raina was a senior legal advisor at the Ministry of Trade
and Tourism in Bulgaria. She has published many publications, including contributing to Aircraft
Finance (Longman) and Aircraft Liens and Detention Rights (Sweet & Maxwell). Raina graduated
with an M.A. from Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Bulgaria.
Borislav Boyanov is the founding partner of Boyanov & Co. and is a “lead name in the field,” and
is highly regarded for his considerable experience and expertise in Bulgarian corporate matters
and wider CEE transactional matters. Sources consider him “the person to talk to for strategic
advice” – Chambers Europe 2015, Corporate/Commercial. Borislav is the only Bulgarian lawyer
regularly listed in Who’s Who Legal for M&A. He is a founder and Member of the Board of Directors
of the British Bulgarian Business Association, a founder and Chairman of the Indian Bulgarian
Business Chamber, the founder, Co-Chair and Honorary Chair of South East Europe Legal Group
(SEE Legal), and the Honorary Consul for Malta in Bulgaria. He is also a member of the Sofia Bar
Association and the International Bar Association. Borislav graduated with an M.A. in law from
Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski, Bulgaria, and was ranked first in his class.
BLAKE, CASSELS & GRAYDON LLP
Donald Gray is head of Blakes’ international aircraft finance practice based in Toronto. He advises
a number of aircraft and engine lessors, financiers, manufacturers, and domestic and international
airlines on aircraft finance and aviation commercial and regulatory law matters. Donald was
vice-president and general counsel of an international charter airline, an Air Canada regional
connector and an international cargo carrier. He also served as vice-president, maintenance and
engineering, for the airline group. Donald has advised on the financing or re-financing of more
than 700 aircraft over the past 10 years and he played a leading role on behalf of aircraft lessors and
financiers in every significant Canadian airline bankruptcy proceeding in the last 25 years. Donald
represented GECAS in the Air Canada restructuring, which received an Airfinance Journal Deal of
the Year Award in 2004. He represented the underwriters in Air Canada’s historic 2013 Enhanced
Equipment Trust Certificate (EETC) financing of its latest 777 deliveries, which was the first
“true” EETC completed by a non-U.S. airline and which received Airfinance Journal and Airline
Economics Deal of the Year Awards in 2014, and in Air Canada’s recent EETC 2015-1. Donald was
a Canadian delegate to the Unidroit/ICAO sessions which prepared the Cape Town Convention
and Aircraft Protocol. He served as a member of the Cape Town Drafting Group and Chair of the
Insolvency Sub-group that prepared Alternatives A and B of the Cape Town Convention. Donald was
a founding member of and has served as chair of the Legal Advisory Panel of the Aviation Working
Group (AWG). He is current Chair of the AWG Canada Contact Group. Donald coordinated the
Canadian airline advisory group submissions to the Government of Canada regarding the 2010/11
Aircraft Sector Understanding (ASU) negotiations. Donald was recognized in Recommended in:
Chambers (Transportation: Aviation Finance), Who’s Who Legal: Canada (Most Highly Regarded
Individual - Aviation), and The Best of the Best (top aviation lawyer in Canada and “one of the top
30 aviation lawyers in the world”). In 2014, Blakes was selected by Airfinance Journal as the top
aviation law firm in North America. Donald is an active IFR (instrument flight rules) rated pilot.
He holds Canadian, United States and South African aviation documents.
Bulgaria
Canada
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
124
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Jason MacIntyre is a partner in the aviation and aerospace practice at Blakes, based in the Toronto
oce. Jason’s practice focuses primarily on secured lending and structured finance transactions,
with a particular emphasis on aviation, project finance and infrastructure. Jason has represented
various aircraft lessors, manufacturers and financiers on aircraft finance and commercial aviation
matters. He has also represented both lenders and borrowers in domestic and international trans-
actions, which have included asset-based lending, project finance, public-private partnerships and
both public and private debt and capital markets oerings. Before joining Blakes, Jason worked
at a major international law firm in London, England, practising in the global asset and project
finance group. During this time, he participated in a secondment to General Electric’s Capital
Aviation Services division in Ireland. Jason has been recognized as a leading lawyer in aviation law
including, The Legal 500 Canada 2016 (Recommended – Banking & Finance), Who’s Who Legal
2015 (Transport - Aviation Finance) and Expert Guides LMG Rising Stars 2015.
WALKERS
Richard Munden is based in the Cayman Islands oce where he is a partner in Walkers’ Global
Finance and Corporate Group. He advises on a broad range of finance and corporate matters and
leads the asset finance practice acting for lenders, leasing companies, manufacturers, export credit
agencies and operators on aircraft, shipping and other asset finance transactions. Prior to joining
Walkers Richard was general counsel and part of the early stage management team of Vueling
Airlines in Barcelona. After the IPO of the airline he was appointed Head of Fleet. Whilst in-house
Richard worked on a range of commercial projects and was heavily involved in the aircraft finance
and leasing market, leading his airline’s fleet acquisition program and manufacturer negotiations.
Before his in-house role Richard was part of the finance group at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer
in London and Madrid. He specialized in cross-border asset finance, bilateral and syndicated
lending and project finance for clients including banks, airlines, leasing companies and other
large corporates.
KING & WOOD MALLESONS
Ma Feng specializes in banking, project finance, domestic and international lending, establishment
projects for financial institutions, and aircraft and equipment financing. Ma Feng has advised a
variety of domestic and foreign banks on banking and foreign exchange matters. Ma Feng has
participated in numerous loan financings, including: bank financing, syndicate financing, acquisition
financing, export credit and trade financing. He has also been extensively involved in project
financing for numerous cross-border investments, involving natural resources and infrastructure,
involving power plants and subways. Ma Feng has been involved in numerous financing and leasing
projects for aircraft, ships, large machinery and other equipment, and has advised various domestic
and international lessors, financiers and airlines on various commercial aircraft finance structures.
In 2016, Ma Feng was ranked as a “Leading Individual” by Chambers Asia Pacific Guide. In 2015,
Ma Feng was recognized as a Rising Star in the area of Banking & Finance by Euro money’s first
Rising Stars guide published by Legal Media Group. Ma Feng joined King & Wood Mallesons in
2002. From 2007 until 2009, he also held a position as legal adviser at a well-known foreign bank
where he provided a full range of legal support for bank management personnel and all business
lines in China including Global Credit Trading, Private Wealth Management, Private and Corporate
Banking, and Global Transaction Banking. Ma Feng earned his LLB and LLM at the University of
International Business and Economics.
Wang Ning specializes in aviation, banking and finance and debt capital markets. He has extensive
experience in aircraft financing and leasing, and assists various domestic and overseas lessors,
financiers and airlines in almost all types of transactions in the market, including U.S. Ex-Im
Cayman Islands
China
(People’s Republic of )
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
125
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
guaranteed financing, European ECA financing, French tax leasing, JOLCO leasing and Chinese
bonded area leasing. Wang Ning also represents clients in business jet acquisitions and is familiar
with each aspect of the purchase, importation, finance and operation. Wang Ning further assists
financial institutions in asset backed securitization transactions and advises on oshore bond
issuance projects.
Wang Ning joined King & Wood Mallesons in November 2006. Wang Ning received his bachelor
degree in law in 2005 in China University of Politics and Law, and received his master’s degree in
internal business law in 2006 in the University of Manchester. Wang Ning was admitted to practice
the law of the PRC in 2009.
AGUILAR CASTILLO LOVE
Marco Solano is a corporate partner in the Costa Rica oce of Aguilar Castillo Love. His practice
focuses on mergers and acquisitions, corporate, finance, transactional and private equity both
locally and cross border. He has represented a wide range of clients, including corporations, foreign
governments, private equity sponsors and investment banks. He holds an LL.M. from Georgetown
University Law Center, Washington, DC. He has practiced in the oces of global law firms in
Washington D.C. and New York, gaining exposure to cross-border transactions throughout the
Americas. He advises clients in a diverse spectrum of sectors including: banking and financial
services, pharmaceutical, retail/services, automobile, heavy construction, medical devices,
technology and software among other industries.
John Aguilar Jr. is a corporate partner in the Costa Rica oce of Aguilar Castillo Love. He is
currently the co-managing partner of the firm. His practice focuses on corporate law, antitrust,
foreign investments, mergers and acquisitions, and taxation both locally and cross-border
throughout the oces in Central America. He holds an LL.M. from Harvard University Law
School, Cambridge, MA. He advises clients in a diverse spectrum of sectors including: technology,
renewable energies, travel and leisure, real estate, media and entertainment, among other industries.
KOCIAN SOLC BALASTIK, ADVOKATNI KANCELAR, S.R.O.
Jiří Horník is a partner and leader of KSB’s aviation practice. Apart from graduating from Czech
universities (Masaryk, Charles), he also graduated from McGill’s Institute of Air & Space Law in 2001 and
was an intern at the Aviation Directorate at the European Commission in 2004. Jiří has built up KSB’s
aviation practice, which is considered one of the few aviation practices in the Czech Republic. He has
been advising local and foreign airlines on aircraft financing, repossession, regulatory and other issues
and has represented them in numerous litigation cases. Jiří is a member of the Management Committee
of the European Air Law Association (EALA) and is recognized by Who’s Who Legal as leading aviation
lawyer in the Czech Republic. He also co-chairs the Prague chapter of NYSBA’s International Section.
Petr Koblovsky is a senior associate at KSB. He graduated from Yale in 2004, as well as from other
leading universities (Masaryk, Charles, Goethe); he was also a visiting researcher at Harvard Law.
Petr joined KSB in 2014 from a top tier international firm where he focused on banking. He has
been advising clients on a wide range of domestic and cross-border financing, private equity and
M&A transactions. His previous experience also includes advising on general debt and equity
capital market transactions. Petr is admitted to practice in New York and in the Czech Republic and
his strong knowledge of economics and finance assists him in his position as a head of the Liberal
Institute and a chairman of the Institute for the Behavioral and Economic Studies.
Costa Rica
Czech Republic
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
126
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
GORRISSEN FEDERSPIEL
Morten L. Jakobsen is a partner in Gorrissen Federspiel, and is the head of the firm’s aviation practice
group. Since 1997, Morten has specialized in aviation and aircraft finance and advises airlines, aircraft
and engine lessors, banks and other players within the aviation sector in matters relating to, inter alia,
leasing, sale/leaseback arrangements, wet-leasing, charters, purchase/sale, maintenance, incidents
and accidents, regulatory matters, registration, arrest and repossession, trac rights, insurance,
code-sharing, airline start-ups, insolvencies and insolvency work-outs and industry related M&A,
procurement, restructurings, etc. In addition to his aviation and aircraft finance practice, Morten
assists his clients, including ship owners, banks, rail operators and rail lessors, on ship, rail, lease and
other finance related issues. For many years, Gorrissen Federspiel has been positioned as a leading
corporate law firm in Denmark with strong and long standing international relations. Gorrissen
Federspiel numbers more than 230 lawyers and has oces both in Copenhagen and Aarhus.
RUSSIN VECCHI & HERBDIA BONETTI
María Esther Fernández A. de Pou is a partner at Russin Vecchi & Herbdia Bonetti and has
extended experience in the fields of aeronautics and airports. She has been for several years the
Legal Counsel for Asociación de Líneas Aéreas (ALA- Airlines Association), as well as the Airports
Association. She provides specialized consulting services to private sector clients in the dierent
branches of these sectors with regard to all their legal needs in the country. She has worked
for several years in the maritime, corporate (mergers and acquisitions), foreign investment and
finance structuring domains, as well as concessions, privatizations, agreements and real estate law.
Throughout her professional career she has advised leading companies in these sectors in their
business operations in the Dominican Republic. In addition, she has represented the Dominican
Republic before the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the Latin American
Civil Aviation Commission (LACAC). She has participated in numerous national and international
conferences of the subject as speaker and has been a professor at several national universities and
institutions in her areas of legal expertise as well as in the field of arbitration and mediation. She has
made several contributions to various national and international publications and has collaborated
internationally in several books on aeronautics. She has participated in dierent committees for the
review and promotion of laws such as the Civil Aeronautics Law, the Company Law, the Arbitration
Law, the Mercantile Restructuring and Judicial Liquidation Law, the Ports Draft Bill, Costums Draft
Bill, and Maritime Code Draft Bill, among others. She is a Judicial Interpreter and Arbitrator of the
Commerce and Production Chamber of Santo Domingo. She holds the positions of President of the
Legal Committee of the American Chamber of Commerce of the Dominican Republic; past member
of the Board of Directors of the Fundación Institucionalidad y Justicia (FINJUS-Instituionality
and Justice Foundation) and member of the Inter-American Bar Association, Asociación Nacional
de Jóvenes Empresarios (ANJE – National Association of Young Entrepreneurs), Asociación
Latinoamericana de Derecho Aeronáutico y Espacial (ALADA – Latin American Association of
Aeronautical and Space Law), among others.
AL KAMEL LAW FIRM
Dr. Mohamed Kamel, Managing Partner and Chief Attorney, was admitted to the Bar in Egypt in
1966. He graduated from Alexandria University, Faculty of Law with a Bachelor of Law in 1966
and has also received a Diplome des etudes superieur (Masters) in 1968, Faculte de Droit et de
Science Economique de l’Universite de Poitiers, and a Doctorat d’Etat (P.H.D) from l’Universite
d’Orleans in 1971. He was a Lecturer in Political Science at Cairo University, Higher Institute of
African Studies from 1971 to 1973 and a lecturer of Business Law at American University, Cairo.
Dr. Kamel served as an international legal consultant in Paris and Geneva between 1967-1974 to
European and multinational clients.
Denmark
Dominican
Republic
Egypt
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
127
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Dr. Kamel has over 40 years’ experience in all areas of corporate and business law, has special
expertise in structuring and negotiating financial, commercial, industrial, mining and petroleum
ventures in Egypt and the Arab world and also serves clients in respect of privatization, real estate,
tax and commercial law, BOOT projects, international Islamic banking and finance and has extensive
experience with respect to NGOs and International Arbitration.
ARIAS & MUÑOZ
Ana Mercedes Lopez is a partner at Arias & Muñoz and holds a Law Degree from Universidad Dr.
Jose Matías Delgado. She is authorized as a practicing attorney and notary public by the Supreme
Court of El Salvador. She has a Master’s Degree in Entrepreneurial Law from Universidad Navarra,
Spain and a Diploma in Family Education from the European Institute of Education. Ana Mercedes
obtained a Master’s degree in Bioethics, by Universidad del Istmo, Guatemala. She is a Partner at
Arias & Muñoz and leads important transactions related mainly to the Corporate and Banking
and Finance practices, along with other specialized areas. She has led project financing deals for
aviation and electricity companies, among others. She has also advised multinational companies
on mergers and acquisitions as well as corporate governance.
Carolina Lazo is an associate at Arias & Muñoz and obtained her Law Degree from Universidad
Dr. José Matías Delgado in 2002. In 2005 she was granted the Fulbright Scholarship by the United
States Government to carry out her Master’s Degree and obtained an LL.M. in International Legal
Studies, with a specialization in International Environmental Law from American University in
Washington, D.C. in 2006, where her performance was recognized by the Washington College of
Law, awarding her with the Edward Bou Award, an academic award given by American University
for outstanding performance in the ILSP program. Prior to these studies, in July 2005, Carolina
participated in the seminar “Introduction to the U.S. Legal System” at Tulane Law School in New
Orleans. Carolina has also participated and attended seminars and conferences, both in El Salvador
and abroad, related to aviation, aviation financing, environmental law, energy, real estate, among
others. Carolina has advised a great number of clients in dierent aircraft financing transactions
from a local regulatory point of view, which has involved leases, subleases and guarantees, involving
local air operators. In that area, Carolina’s participation is to provide opinions and other advice
related to issues arising from such transactions such as the registration of documents on the register.
RAIDLA ELLEX
Toomas Vaher is a partner of Raidla Ellex law firm in Estonia. He is one of the most highly regarded
litigation experts in Estonia and is also known as a long time board member and the former president
of Estonian Bar Association (2010–2013). Over the years, Toomas has advised clients in a number of
large and complex litigation matters. Toomas has participated in arbitration proceedings as arbiter
and party representative, both in domestic and international arbitration. He is also a recognized
expert and adviser in alternative dispute resolution.
MUNRO LEYS
Richard Naidu is a Partner at Munro Leys and the leader of the firm’s aviation practice. Richard
acts for operators, lessors and financiers on aircraft leases, security documentation, taxation and
general advice. He is a member of the International Bar Association Aviation Committee and joint
author of the Fiji chapter of Aircraft Finance: Registration, Security and Enforcement (ed. Graham
McBain, Sweet & Maxwell).
El Salvador
Estonia
Fiji
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
128
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Emily King is an Associate at Munro Leys and advises operators, lessors and financiers on aircraft
leases, security documentation, stamp duty and registration issues in Fiji. Emily works alongside
Richard Naidu in Munro Leys’ aviation practice.
BORENIUS
Ulla von Weissenberg has been working with shipping, aviation and other logistics law issues
since 1994. She is regularly involved in complex cross-border litigations and arbitrations. Ulla is
as well-experienced in contact drafting with deep knowledge on issues relating to various aspects
of shipbuilding and sale of second hand tonnage, aircraft financing and various insurance related
issues. She is one of the most renowned experts in Finland in legal aspects of international trade
including sanctions and trade restrictions. Presently Ulla is heading the Shipping, Transport and
Insurance practice of Borenius, and the team works closely together with the other experienced
practices of Borenius.
Robert Peldán gives advice on insolvency, dispute resolution and banking & finance related matters.
Robert has substantial experience in advising companies, creditors, lenders, investors, and other
stakeholders on a variety of liquidations, distressed situations, and complex restructuring matters.
During his career, Robert has engaged in more than 450 insolvency and corporate related tasks
and has acted as administrator in bankruptcies and restructurings. In addition to legal insolvency
proceedings, Robert has given advice in several voluntary restructurings advising both the creditors
and the distressed companies. Currently, Robert leads Borenius Restructuring & Insolvency team
in Helsinki and forms a part of Borenius highly-merited Banking & Finance team.
HÉNAFF D’ESTRÉES
Yves Héna d’Estrées is a member of the Paris and New York bars, practices and is ocially
certified in France as a specialist in commercial, business and competition law, and in interna-
tional law and the law of the European Union. Yves is the chairman of the Section on Aircraft,
SFDAS (French Society of Air and Space Law), and the Chairman of Eurolegal (www.eurolegal.
net). He organized the first conference on aircraft repossession in France, June 1, 2015 which
included the participation of the DGAC, the French CAA. Yves is the author of many publications
including “Aircraft Finance, Registration, Security and Enforcement”, sections on France, French
Polynesia and New Caledonia, “Aircraft Liens & Detention Rights”, section on France, and “Aircraft
Financing in France” (Thomson - Sweet & Maxwell, London, General Editor Graham McBain),
and “La Location d’Aéronef” (Aircraft leasing) (JurisClasseur Transport - LexisNexis, Paris).
EHLERS, EHLERS & PARTNER
P. Nikolai Ehlers (Dr.), the partner in charge of the aviation practice of Ehlers, Ehlers & Partner
(Munich/Germany), is qualified as a lawyer both in Germany and in New York. Dr. Ehlers regularly
advises on aircraft and engine finance and lease transactions (German and cross- border leases, sale
and purchase of aircraft and engines, registration of title and security interests, repossession). He
has extensive experience of advising and representing airlines, aerospace manufacturers and their
insurers in liability matters and conducting complex litigation involving international parties. His
practice also focuses on regulatory issues, passenger rights, airport access, competition matters,
alliances and code sharing, insolvency proceedings, tour operator liability regulation, CRS matters,
maintenance contracts, licensing, corporate transactions, etc. Dr. Ehlers holds degrees from the
Cologne and the McGill Institutes of Air and Space Law. He is an ocer of the European Air Law
Association, a member of the advisory board of the Journal of Air Law and Commerce (SMU-Dallas)
and of the German Journal of Air and Space Law (ZLW). Dr. Ehlers has written and co-written
Finland
France, French
Polynesia and
New Caledonia
Germany
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
129
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
several books and numerous articles. He has spoken on air law topics in Europe, the US, the Middle
East, Asia and Australia. For many years he has organized the biennial Munich Liability Seminar
of the European Air Law Association.
AGUILAR CASTILLO LOVE
Juan Carlos Castillo is a partner in the Guatemala oce of Aguilar Castillo Love. Juan is a graduate
of the Universidad Francisco Marroquin (Lawyer and Notary Public, magna cum laude (1991) and
Harvard University, Law School (LL.M., 1991). Juan has been a legal advisor to the Guatemalan
Government in the Privatization of Electric Generation and Distribution Companies, and to the
Guatemalan Government in the Privatization of Guatemala’s Ports and Airports. He is a member of
the Colegio de Abogados de Guatemala. Juan authored a publication titled “Judicial Independence
in Guatemala, A Critical Analysis”, which was published at Harvard Law School in 1991. Juan was
also the President of the Guatemalan Stock Exchange Market, 1999 – 2007. and is a professor of
Public International Law, Universidad Francisco Marroquin since 1993.
Natalia Callejas is an associate in the Guatemala oce of Aguilar Castillo Love and is admitted
to practice in Guatemala. Natalia is a graduate of the Universidad Francisco Marroquín (Lawyer
and Notary Public, 2013) and a member of the Guatemalan Bar Association.
MOURANT OZANNES
John Rochester is a partner in Mourant Ozannes’ Guernsey Finance & Corporate team. John’s
practice covers corporate (including private equity, public and private M&A, joint ventures,
corporate structuring and corporate real estate structuring and transactions), banking and finance
and asset finance (including aircraft and ship finance). Prior to joining the Guernsey oce, John
spent five years working in Mourant Ozannes’ Jersey Finance & Corporate team and, prior to that,
four years in another major oshore firm’s BVI oce. John trained as a solicitor at Linklaters’
London and Hong Kong oces, and qualified into their Asset Finance department.
Alana Gillies is a senior associate at Mourant Ozannes. Prior to joining Mourant Ozannes, Alana
worked at Anderson Strathern LLP in Scotland from 2008 until April 2014. Alana specializes in
providing advice on all aspects of Guernsey corporate and banking law for private limited companies,
partnerships, public bodies and individuals including advising on mergers and acquisitions, banking
and finance (including aircraft finance), Guernsey competition law, standard terms & conditions
and bespoke commercial contracts.
PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN (HK) LLP
Paul Jebely is the managing partner of Pillsbury’s Hong Kong oce and a co-leader of the firm’s
Asset Finance practice. He is recognized as a leading aviation lawyer, advising a range of clients on
billions of dollars of commercial and business aircraft finance transactions. Mr. Jebely has been
repeatedly recognized by legal directories such as Chambers, Legal 500 and Who’s Who as a “very
highly rated” leading individual in aviation finance and singled out in Chambers as “extremely
competent,” “commercially aware,” “responsive,” “courteous,” “technically skilled,” “capable,”
“attentive” and “driven.” He has been quoted by the Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg,
the China Business Network and various industry publications on the basis of his experience in
the aviation markets in Asia and Africa in particular. Among other recognition, he was the 2015
recipient of the “Outstanding Contribution to African Aviation Development” award—the only
lawyer to receive the award since its inception in 1999, and was recognized by Asian Legal Business
in October 2016 among “Asia 40 Under 40” top “brightest legal minds in the region.”
Guatemala
Guernsey
Hong Kong
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
130
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Mr. Jebely is admitted to practice law in England, New York and Ontario. He is experienced in
negotiating and executing international commercial and business aircraft and engine financing,
leasing and trading transactions, and in advising in various enforcement and repossession situa-
tions. He has advised clients that represent the full range of industry participants in transactions
concerning all classes of commercial and business aircraft. He is currently the Chairman of the
Community of Hong Kong Aviation Professionals, and a member of the Board of Governors of the
Asian Business Aviation Association.
LAKATOS, KÖVES AND PARTNERS
Szabolcs Mestyán is a partner at Lakatos, Köves and Partners and head of the firm’s banking and
finance and aviation practice. He has developed expertise in and acquired knowledge of asset
and project finance, as well as the Hungarian law aspects of securitization matters. Szabolcs is
recognized internationally as the best Hungarian aviation law expert. Szabolcs is also regarded
as an up-and-coming and cutting-edge expert in capital markets transactions, in aircraft finance
and in banking consumer protection matters. He obtained a diploma in law from the Faculty of
Law and Politics at Eötvös Loránd University in 2005. He also holds an LL.M. degree which he
obtained from the University of London. He joined Lakatos, Köves and Partners in 2005, and
became a partner as of 2014.
RNCLEGAL
Ravi Nath has 25 years of experience in aviation related laws including aircraft equipment and
facility financing, regulatory and litigation. He was the Chair of the Aviation Committee of the
International Bar Association, and is the Editor/Author of various books and papers on aviation
laws. He regularly advises major aircraft manufacturers, banks and financial Institutions. His
practice includes government regulations, companies, cross-border financing and securitization.
During the last ten years he has advised on transaction in excess of US $ 14 billion. The Legal 500
stated this: “Ravi Nath’s esteemed reputation as an aviation expert puts clear blue water between
Rajinder Narain & Co. and its rivals…”. He is a frequent speaker at various conferences. He serves
on the International Registry’s Advisory Board. The Bar Association of India has conferred its
highest honor on him. He was invited along with India’s Finance Minister, Mr. P. Chidambaram
and Mr. Nariman, President Bar Association to be a co-author on a book relating to legal aspects
of Doing Business in India. He is a partner at one of India’s oldest legal firms. Two of the firm’s
partners were Chief Justices of the Delhi High Court and one a President of The High Court Bar
Association. Mr. Nath was the President of the Inter Pacific Bar Association in 2004.
Ajay Kumar has advised on leasing, financing, securitization and structuring of various cross
border aviation matters. He has vast experience of repossession, litigation and tax related matters
at the firm where the clients include all major manufacturers, lessors, leading banks & financial
institutions and export credit agencies across the globe. Ajay’s practice areas also include general
corporate and commercial, dispute resolution and private equity. He is used to working across
several time zones and has been involved in extensive documentation, negotiations and legal due
diligence. He has nearly 10 years of experience since his admission.
Hungary
India
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
131
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
ROOSDIONO & PARTNERS
Afriyan Rachmad is a partner at Roosdiono & Partners and is a projects and infrastructure
specialist with particular expertise in aircraft financing, resources and projects including turnkey
and construction contracts, production sharing contracts, farm-out and service agreements. He
represents onshore and oshore clients and assists government institutions and regulators on major
infrastructure projects in the sectors of airport, toll roads, electricity, railways, power plants and
water, and major companies in mining and oil & gas sectors. He also advises clients on corporate
& commercial matters, mergers and acquisitions, due diligence, aircraft financing transactions
as well as dispute resolution matters and arbitration proceedings and representation at criminal
and civil proceedings in various court levels in Indonesia. Afriyan joined Roosdiono & Partners
as an associate in October 2009 and was subsequently promoted to Senior Associate in January
2011 and Partner in January 2014. Prior to joining Roosdiono & Partners, Afriyan was a lawyer in
a major corporate law firm focusing on infrastructure projects. Afriyan has been invited to speak
at various conferences and seminars including Construction Business Mission to Jakarta, SBM
ITB – Business Contract and Alternative Dispute Settlement and Capitalizing on Indonesia’s
Diverse Investment Opportunities.
Bramantyo A. Pratama is a senior associate at Roosdiono & Partners. While at the firm, Bramantyo
has been involved in various types of projects representing both domestic and multinational clients
in the field of aviation, shipping, foreign direct investment, TMT, and infrastructure. He also has
extensive experiences in advising competition law, corporate & commercial matters, and M&A.
Bramantyo joined Roosdiono & Partners as a trainee associate in April 2010 and was subsequently
promoted to Senior Associate in 2013. Prior to joining Roosdiono & Partners, he worked as a legal
counsel in a leading telecommunication company in Indonesia. Bramantyo holds a Bachelor’s degree
in Law (SH) from the University of Indonesia (2008), and is a Member of PERADI (Indonesian
Bar Association).
WALKERS
Ken Rush is a partner and head of the Walkers Ireland Asset & Aviation Finance Group. He
specializes in all aspects of asset finance and leasing with a focus on the financing and leasing of
aircraft, aircraft engines, helicopters and other heavy transportation assets (such as rolling stock
and vessels). Ken’s clients include aircraft owners, arrangers, airlines, asset financiers and lessors.
Ken is ranked as one of Ireland’s leading aviation finance experts by the major legal directories
including Chambers & Partners, Legal 500 and IFLR 1000. Prior to joining Walkers Ken worked in
the asset and structured finance practice of Cliord Chance London and also in-house with RBS
Aerospace (now SMBC Aviation Capital).
Aaron McGarry is a partner in the Walkers Ireland Asset and Aviation Finance Group. He has
extensive experience in asset and asset backed finance acting for banks, private equity firms,
investors and borrowers in relation to trade receivables, invoice discounting and aircraft financing.
Aaron has a broad grounding across an extensive range of aviation financing solutions from
pre-delivery financing, sale and lease back financing and debt financing to cross border tax driven
arrangements that tap into Ireland’s worldwide double tax treaty network. Aaron is ranked as a
leading lawyer by Chambers & Partners and Legal 500. Prior to joining Walkers, Aaron worked in
the finance group at Mayer Brown for almost 6 years after qualifying at the same firm.
Indonesia
Ireland
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
132
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
NASCHITZ, BRANDES, AMIR & CO.
Isaac Winder is the head of the aviation department and partner at Naschitz, Brandes, Amir &
Co. The law firms of Hermann, Makov & Co. in which Isaac Winder was a partner and Naschitz,
Brandes, Amir & Co. have merged recently. The aviation department at Naschitz, Brandes, Amir
& Co. specializes in all aspects relating to aviation law, insurance law, commercial law and related
matters. Isaac has been practicing aviation law since the 1980s and has a vast experience in aviation
law including defending airlines and insurers in litigation in aviation matters (including passenger
and cargo claims, repossession of aircraft), and other related matters. Isaac has represented airlines
and insurers in major cases and is a co-author of the Israeli chapter in the publication: “Aircraft
Repossession and Enforcement” (Wolters Kluwer 2010).
STUDIO PIERALLINI
Laura Pierallini, founder and named partner of Studio Pierallini, spent years at the legal and
tax department of Arthur Andersen and was the managing partner of the international law firm
Coudert Brothers in Rome. She is a professor of commercial and air law at LUISS University
of Rome. She has practiced aviation law since 1988, oering a complete range of assistance to
airlines, lessors, financiers, manufacturers, airports, handlers and travel agents, including aircraft
financing, regulatory, contentious, insurance, tax, labor, customs and corporate. She has assisted
IPOs of Italian airlines and M&A of domestic airlines by foreign airlines, and has advised airlines
and airport handlers in restructuring as well as in bankruptcy and insolvency procedures. She
organizes and attends many conferences on aviation, delivering speeches and moderating panels
at various Italian and international symposia, including those organized by IATA, EALA, and
EAC. Ms. Pierallini is named as leading aviation lawyer by several guides including Expert Guides
– Aviation Lawyers, Expert Guides – Best of the Best, Who’s Who Legal and The Legal 500. The
firm has been named Aviation Law Firm of the Year by ACQ, Intercontinental Finance, Global Law
Experts and Finance Monthly. She is a Committee member of European Air Law Association, a
member of the International Aviation Women’s Association and the European Aviation Club and
has been shortlisted as “Best Aviation Lawyer” for the Europe Women in Business Law Awards
in 2015 and 2016.
Gianluigi Ascenzi is a senior associate at Studio Pierallini and has an extensive expertise in all areas
of aviation law, with over 14 years of practice. He concentrates on commercial, cargo and private jet
carrier transactions, with broad experience in the structuring, drafting and negotiation of acquisition,
financing and leasing operations and portfolio sales. Gianluigi also provides a full range of legal
services to clients involved in the industry (mainly financial institutions, lessors, lessees, airframe
and engine manufacturers, airlines, purchasers and sellers of aircraft equipment) in respect of
aircraft management, registration and deregistration of aircraft and mortgages, security matters and
enforcement issues. He deals on a regular basis with the negotiation and closing of sophisticated
transactions, including operating leases, code-share agreements, wet leases, maintenance and
technical services agreements. He has a significant expertise in various regulatory aspects of the
air transport system, including competition issues, trac rights and slots, data and consumer
protection, relationships and filings with the civil aviation authorities, environmental issues, airport
charges and ground handling. Gianluigi also represents clients in all aspects of corporate and
commercial law, including M&A transactions, relationships with suppliers, clients and business
partners, corporate governance, acquisition and management of assets. He is an attendee at aviation
conferences worldwide and contributes to international publications on aviation law. Gianluigi is
a member of the bar in Italy. He received his law degree from LUISS - University of Rome in 2000.
Israel
Italy
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
133
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
MOURANT OZANNES
James Hill is a partner in Mourant Ozannes’ Finance & Corporate team. James has a wide ranging
practice covering corporate (including private equity, public and private M&A, joint ventures,
corporate structuring and JPUT and corporate real estate structuring and transactions), equity
capital markets (including IPOs and redomiciliations), banking and finance, debt capital markets and
Channel Island Securities Exchange listings. James has been involved in many of the major trans-
actions in Jersey in recent years and has played an important role in company law developments.
Alastair Syvret has advised on the establishment and operation of a variety of aircraft owning
structures using Jersey companies over more than 20 years. These have included a number of
significant aircraft securitization vehicles. He has also advised on various refinancings and restruc-
turings of distressed entities.
PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
Olivia Matsushita is a partner in Pillsbury’s Finance practice and a member of the Asset Finance
team. Based in Tokyo, Olivia has been resident in the Japanese market for several years and her
practice spans acquisition financing, project financing of cross-border energy and infrastructure
transactions and the financing of moveable assets utilising a range of financing structures. Olivia
is an English and Australian law qualified solicitor and is registered as a Foreign Admitted
Lawyer (gaikokuho jimu bengoshi) in Japan. She is fluent in Japanese. Olivia has been named a
“Next-Generation Lawyer” for Projects and Energy in Japan in the 2016 edition of The Legal 500.
Masao Kasatsugu is a senior associate based in Pillsbury’s Tokyo oce and is a member of the Asset
Finance team. He regularly advises Japanese clients that include major trading houses, financial
institutions and manufacturers on their cross border financing transactions, energy related projects,
mergers and acquisitions, restructurings and general corporate law. He is a Japanese qualified
Bengoshi and a member of the Dai-ichi Tokyo Bar Association.
ALI SHARIF ZU’BI ADVOCATES & LEGAL CONSULTANTS
Khaled Asfour joined Ali Sharif Zu’bi Advocates & Legal Consultants in April 1992 as an associate.
He became a partner in August 1997 and Ali Sharif Zu’bi Advocates & Legal Consultants’ Managing
Partner in 2005. Khaled, an exceptional lawyer with extensive legal and financial expertise, is head
of Ali Sharif Zu’bi Advocates & Legal Consultants’ Projects and Major Transactions Department.
He has acted as lead lawyer on a variety of financing transactions including several aviation finance
transactions, the underwriting and syndication of loans, secured commercial lending transactions,
commercial paper, foreign trade financing transactions and a variety of equity and debt finance.
Leena Nusseir joined Ali Sharif Zu’bi Advocates & Legal Consultant in January 2011 after having
graduated with a Bachelors of Law (LL.B.) from the University of Reading and completed the Legal
Practice Course in the College of Law, London. She became a member Ali Sharif Zu’bi Advocates
& Legal Consultants’ projects and major transactions team immediately upon joining the firm.
Leena has worked on several project finance transactions including secured commercial lending
transactions and aviation finance and leasing transactions where she represented various aircraft
leasing companies, owners, security trustees and financiers.
Jersey
Japan
Jordan
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
134
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
MMAN ADVOCATES
Suzanne Muthaura is the Managing Partner of MMAN Advocates. She has over fifteen years’
experience in commercial and corporate law practice, with particular expertise in asset finance,
equipment leasing, capital markets, corporate advice, commercial contracts, infrastructure projects,
mergers and acquisitions, and private equity. Suzanne has acted as lead counsel to both local and
international clients in numerous transactions over the years. In addition to being an Advocate of
the High Court of Kenya, she is a Certified Public Secretary and a member of the Law Society of
Kenya. She holds an LL.M. in Corporate and Commercial law from the London School of Economics,
and an LL.B. degree from the University of Warwick. For several years, Suzanne has been ranked
by internationally recognized rating firm Chambers Global, as one of Kenya’s leading commercial
lawyers and in 2015 she was recognized as one of the world’s leading practitioners in Aviation
Finance by Who’s Who Legal.
Christopher Kiragu is a Senior Associate with MMAN Advocates. He has over five years’ experience
in commercial and corporate law practice with emphasis in aircraft leasing and financing, capital
market transactions, mergers and acquisitions and private equity. In addition to being an Advocate
of the High Court of Kenya, he is a member of the Law Society of Kenya. He holds an LL.B. (Hons)
degree from the University of Leeds, and a Diploma from the Kenya School of Law.
KIM & CHANG
Robert Gilbert is partner at Kim & Chang and is a member of the firm’s Transportation Finance
team with over twenty years’ experience in representing clients in transportation finance matters.
Mr. Gilbert advises export-credit agencies, lessors, commercial and investment banks and others in
matters including sales and purchases of new and used commercial aircraft, cross-border aircraft
operating and finance leases, registration and transfer of aircraft mortgages and similar transactions
for spare aircraft engines, corporate jets, rolling stock and vessels. Mr. Gilbert has represented U.S.
and European export credit agencies in numerous structured finance transactions with airlines
in Korea. Robert Gilbert is a foreign attorney with extensive experience in a wide range of cross-
border investment and financing transactions. His main areas of practice include the financing of
commercial aircraft and aircraft engines, acting for foreign lenders, owners and lessors in cross
border loans and finance and operating leases of commercial aircraft, and the licensing of life
and non-life insurers in Korea, including the establishment or acquisition of local branches and
subsidiaries, and operations. He also remains active in financial litigation, particularly relating to
disputes under letters of credit, and in certain U.S. defense contracting disputes. Mr. Gilbert served
on the Foreign Investor Advisor Council to the Mayor of Seoul and the Korean Advisory Council
to the Commander, U.S. Forces Korea. He has repeatedly been recognized by being named one
of the world’s leading aviation lawyers in “The International Who’s Who of Aviation Lawyers”.
Young Min Kim is a partner at Kim & Chang. His practice focuses on cross-border finance trans-
actions, including aircraft, banking, corporate, and project finance. He is praised by clients for his
ability to bring solutions that go beyond legal advice.
KLAVINS ELLEX
Ivars Slokenbergs is a senior counsel at Klavins Ellex. He has experience in a wide range of
corporate transactions, including mergers and acquisitions of numerous companies in the energy,
financial, manufacturing, services, media, telecommunications, IT and food & beverage sectors. He
also has expertise in aviation, including advising clients in commercial aircraft leasing and finance
transactions. He is Vice Chairman of the Foreign Investors’ Council in Latvia and a Board Member
of the Latvian Transatlantic Organization.
Kenya
Korea
Latvia
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
135
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
SH LAWYERS
Antoine Habib is the founder and managing partner of SH Lawyers. He holds a D.E.A. in Banking
and Financial law from Université St. Joseph, Lebanon and is a member of the Beirut Bar Association.
He has experience in London courts, having worked in London at Nigel Harris Law Firm. He is
a former member of Raphael et Associes Law Firm where he worked from 2003 until 2011. His
expertise covers various corporate law and international law matters, real estate, insurance and
re-insurance. He has counseled and represented a wide base of Lebanese and International clients,
based in Lebanon, Africa, and the G.C.C. countries, mainly Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Jordan.
Aya Matar is a Senior Associate in the corporate and commercial practice at SH Lawyers. She
earned her bachelor’s degree in law from La Sagesse School of Law year 2009, where she ranked
first for four consecutive years and was thereafter admitted to the Beirut Bar Association. Aya
holds an LL.M in International Commercial Law from King’s College, London and specializes in
corporate, commercial, litigation, arbitration and ADR and is a member of the Chartered Institute
of Arbitrators, London (MCIArb).
VALIŪNAS IR PARTNERIAI ELLEX
Vytautas Želvys joined the Banking and Finance practice of law firm LAWIN Vilnius oce
(currently Valiunas Ellex) in 2009 as a trainee. He graduated from the masters program of the
law school of the Mykolas Romeris University in 2010, where he studied business law. During his
work with Valiunas Ellex, he consulted banks and other creditors acting in Lithuania on lending
and taking security, assisted Lithuanian as well as foreign aircraft lessors and air operators in daily
legal and practical matters. Currently Vytautas is a member of Lending Transactions & Structuring
and Debt Restructuring & Recovery teams of Banking and Finance practice, specializing in lending
and security, including aircraft financing matters.
Gediminas Rečiūnas is a partner and a head of Valiunas Ellex Finance and Tax Practice Group,
which is focused on all major areas of finance and tax law, including banking & finance, capital
markets, finance regulatory (including banking regulatory), finance restructuring & refinancing,
funds, investments services, tax, project finance and aircraft, shipping & other asset finance.
Gediminas has over 18 years’ experience in finance and tax law and is well regarded in the market
for his multiple fields of expertise. Before joining LAWIN Vilnius oce (currently Valiunas Ellex)
in 2001, Gediminas was appointed as a General Counsel and Board member at AB SAMPO Bankas,
Vilnius (former Lithuanian Development Bank), Legal advisor at Pragma Corporation (U.S. consul-
tancy firm carrying out Lithuanian capital markets development project) and Legal advisor at
World Council of Credit Unions.
MANUELA ANTONIO – LAWYERS AND NOTARIES
Pedro Ribeiro E Castro is a Senior Associate at Manuela António – Lawyers and Notaries, having
joined the firm in 2009. Pedro focuses mainly in the practice areas of Aviation, Banking & Finance
and Corporate / M&A. Pedro advises on all matters of aircraft finance, acquisition and leasing, acting
for owners, banks, lessors, manufacturers and ECAs, and he also assists clients in the relationship
with regulatory agencies. In addition, Pedro has a broad experience in banking & finance, advising
lenders and borrowers in secured and unsecured loans, corporate finance, asset finance, restruc-
turings and refinancing. Pedro also advises on all corporate matters, including mergers, acquisitions,
joint-ventures, cross-border transactions, reorganizations, corporate governance and commercial
contracts. Pedro’s other areas of practice include Project Finance, Public and Administrative Law,
Public Procurement and Transportation and Shipping, where he has acquired particular experience
in infrastructure and transportation projects.
Lebanon
Lithuania
Macau
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
136
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Afonso Cardoso De Menezes joined the firm in 2014 as a Foreign Lawyer. Afonso focuses mainly
in the areas of Corporate and Banking & Finance, providing assistance to several domestic and
foreign credit institutions and other financial entities. Afonso provides assistance in all matters
related to aviation and asset finance. Afonso also has relevant professional experience in Real
Estate and Construction matters, as he was actively involved in several transactions, notably acting
for Portuguese and Spanish corporations. In addition, the in-house experience at a Portuguese
investment bank provided Afonso with a specific know-how on Capital Markets, Asset Management
and Private Equity areas, as well as a focus on company’s business. Afonso has a broad experience
in Mergers & Acquisitions, particularly in reorganization and restructuring of financial entities.
RAJA, DARRYL & LOH
Chong Kok Seng is a partner at Raja, Darryl & Loh and is the firm’s specialist in aviation law,
having acted for major airlines, aircraft lessors and banks, collateral agents and security trustees
in advising on local laws in relation to the sale and purchase, lease and/or financing and securiti-
zation of aircraft. Recently, Kok Seng has also been advising various lessors that had their leases
terminated or repudiated by Malaysian Airline System Berhad (“MAS”) as a result of or arising
from the restructuring of the business of MAS to a new entity, Malaysian Airlines Berhad, via the
Malaysian Airline System Berhad (Administration) Act 2015. Kok Seng obtained his Bachelor’s
degree in Law from the University of London in the United Kingdom in 2001 and subsequently
sat for and obtained the Certificate in Legal Practice from the Malaysian Qualifying Board. He was
called to the Peninsular Malaysian Bar in November 2003 after having read in Chambers with the
Firm. Kok Seng joined the ranks of the partners on 1st March 2011.
CONYERS DILL & PEARMAN
Ashvan Luckraz is an associate in the Mauritius oce of Conyers Dill & Pearman. Ashvan
joined Conyers in 2012. Ashvan’s practice includes all areas of corporate and commercial law,
with particular emphasis on finance, trusts and investment funds. He advises investment banks,
private equity houses and multinationals on cross border and multi-jurisdictional aspects of their
transactions. Ashvan is a member of the bar in England and Wales and in Mauritius. Ashvan holds
both a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) and Master of Laws (LL.M.) degree from the London School of
Economics and Political Science.
Sameer Tegally is an associate and director in the Mauritius oce of Conyers Dill & Pearman.
Sameer joined Conyers in 2008. Sameer’s practice covers corporate, banking and finance (including
Islamic finance) and trusts/foundations. Sameer advises leading multinationals and international
banks on their cross-border investments, financing and trading, particularly with Asia, Africa and
the Middle East. Sameer also advises institutional and private clients on all aspects of non-conten-
tious Mauritius trusts and foundations law. Sameer has contributed several articles in renowned
global publications in the fields of corporate law, Islamic finance and trusts. Sameer is a member
of the bar in Mauritius and is a registered associate in Bermuda. Sameer is recognized in the 2015
edition (and since 2012) of Chambers Global (Mauritius general business law: foreign). He is also
recognized as a leading lawyer, Islamic Finance News 2012 (oshore Islamic finance) and is named
a leading lawyer, Islamic Finance News poll 2012 (asset and fund management).
Malaysia
Mauritius
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
137
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
ABOGADOS SIERRA Y VAZQUEZ
Carlos Sierra graduated as an attorney from the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de México, and
has coursed postgraduate studies in civil and commercial law at the Escuela Libre de Derecho,
Duke University and the Universite Libre de Bruxelles. Mr. Sierra coursed LLM studies in Air
and Space Law at Leiden University in the Netherlands. Mr. Sierra has been in private practice
for more than 21 years and has been a partner at Abogados Sierra y Vazquez since its inception as
Alegre y Sierra in 1994. During his professional life, he has been involved in the structuring and
implementation of transactions involving the lease, sale and finance of commercial and business
aircraft to various airlines, companies and individuals in México. He currently represents some
of the major companies that lease and finance commercial aircraft from around the world. He has
also advised lessors, financiers, commercial aircraft owners and business aircraft owners regarding
their rights in various contexts, including in situations where lessees have defaulted on their
contractual obligations and insolvency and liquidation proceedings of various Mexican airlines.
He has acted as a speaker and moderator of various panels on aircraft finance and leasing and
aviation law topics at various international conferences organized by the AWG, the US Trade and
Development Agency, IATA, ALTA, IBA and other international entities. Mr. Sierra is also a member
of the legal advisory panel of the Aviation Working Group, of which he is currently vice-chair, the
International Registry Advisory Board and of the board of the Aviation Law Committee of the
International Bar Association (IBA).
Viridiana Barquin is an associate at and practices in the areas of aviation, corporate and command
Law, cross-border transactions and international business. Mrs. Barquin has experience as Legal
Counsel for internationally-oriented companies dealing with financing, leasing, sales, acquisitions,
corporate matters, antitrust, bankruptcy and insolvency, foreign investment, structuring and
negotiation of a full range of commercial agreements on several frameworks and representation
of foreign companies in numerous disputes resulting in the successful repossession of assets
through settlement and alternative methods of dispute resolution. Mrs. Barquin obtained her law
degree at Universidad La Salle, Mexico City and holds a Master Degree in International Business
by Universidad La Salle, Barcelona, Spain; International Air Law, Law of Aviation Insurance
and Airline Contract Law by International Air Transport Association (IATA), and International
Arbitration by Escuela Libre de Derecho, Mexico City.
CSBA & ASSOCIATES
Mafalda Rodrigues Fonseca is a founding partner of CSBA - Carlos de Sousa e Brito, Isabel
Marinho, Mafalda Rodrigues Fonseca & Associados - Sociedade de Advogados RL and practices
in the areas of commercial, corporate and company law, maritime law, aviation law and labor law.
Mafalda graduated with a law degree from the Portuguese Catholic University. She also holds a
postgraduate degree in Commercial Law from the Portuguese Catholic University, and is a speaker
in various seminars and conferences relating to her areas of practice. Mafalda has been admitted
to the Portuguese Bar Association since 2004.
Isabel Marinho is a founding partner of CSBA - Carlos de Sousa e Brito, Isabel Marinho, Mafalda
Rodrigues Fonseca & Associados - Sociedade de Advogados RL and practices in the areas of tax
law, tax litigation, corporate restructuring, debt recovery and insolvency, agriculture, environment
and public procurement. Isabel graduated with a law degree from the University of Lisbon. She
also holds postgraduate degrees in Management and Taxation from ISCTE and in Legislative
Elaboration from the Law Faculty of Lisbon. Isabel has been admitted to the Portuguese Bar
Association since 1990.
Mexico
Mozambique,
Portugal
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
138
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
DFDL
Thida Aye is a partner in DFDL. She is a licensed Myanmar lawyer and a former judge. She has
practiced business and commercial law at the law firm that is now DFDL for over twenty years.
James Finch is a lawyer and licensed in the United States. He is a partner in DFDL and has practiced
in Myanmar with Thida Aye for over twenty years, as well.
A major portion of the practice of Thida Aye and James Finch is aviation law, particularly repre-
senting foreign sellers, sources of finance and lessors of aircraft to airlines in Myanmar. They have
collaborated on several international publications with respect to aviation law.
ENSAFRICA
Wolf Wohlers is a director at ENSafrica, Namibia (incorporated as Lorentz Angula Inc.), which
forms part of the ENSafrica group of legal practices which has oces across various jurisdictions in
Africa. Wolf specializes in corporate commercial, mining and energy (including oil and gas), banking
and finance and mergers and acquisitions. He has represented clients in a number of industries
including mining and petroleum. Wolf’s experience includes advising clients on matters relating to
mining, petroleum and energy, mergers and acquisitions, contracts and trusts drafting and general
corporate and commercial law. He is also experienced in advising on aviation law financing issues
and notarial work. Wolf is recognized as a leading lawyer by the following reputable rating agencies
and their publications:
• Chambers and Partners Guide to the World’s Leading Lawyers 2015 – General Business Law
(Namibia); 2014 – Mining (Namibia)
• IFLR 1000 2015 – Banking, Energy and Infrastructure, Mergers and Acquisitions, Project
Development, Project Finance (Namibia)
• The International Who’s Who of Mining Lawyers 2013 and 2014 (Namibia)
DE BRAUW BLACKSTONE WESTBROEK N.V.
Berend Crans is a partner at De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek N.V. and has a broad finance practice.
In addition to general banking and finance transactions, he specializes in asset and project finance.
Throughout his career at De Brauw, he has represented lessees, lenders and equity investors in
numerous cross-border lease transactions. He has played a pioneering role in designing new
transaction structures and restructuring existing structures to accommodate new asset classes. He
also advises clients in structured finance transactions and debt restructurings. Berend has particular
expertise in aviation law and aircraft finance and has been involved, mainly as lender counsel, in
many aircraft finance transactions, including JLLs, GLLs, ECA supported transactions, acquisitions
of aircraft lease portfolios and securitizations. Berend has represented lessors and lenders in airline
insolvencies. He is a guest lecturer in aircraft finance in the Advanced LL.M. Program in Air &
Space Law of the International Institute for Air and Space Law at Leiden University. Berend is De
Brauw’s expert on matters and developments in African jurisdictions.
Thijs Elseman is a senior associate at De Brauw Blackstone Westbroek. Thijs specializes in banking,
financial markets regulation and corporate financing, including syndicated loans, asset financing and
debt restructuring. Since joining De Brauw in 2010, Thijs has been involved and gained substantial
experience in aircraft finance transactions. Recent transactions include representing a major
aircraft lessor company, and acting as Dutch transaction counsel, in a number of aircraft sale and
financing transactions. Thijs is currently seconded to De Brauw London.
Myanmar
Namibia
Netherlands
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
139
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
BUDDLE FINDLAY
Frank Porter is a senior partner in Buddle Findlay’s Auckland oce and heads Buddle Findlay’s
aviation team. Frank has for many years advised airlines, aircraft manufacturers, banks, leasing
companies, export credit agencies and insurers on all matters relating to aircraft. He is very experi-
enced particularly in matters relating to the leasing, financing and repossession of aircraft. Frank
has published many articles and written chapters for books on aircraft financing and related areas.
The International Who’s Who of Aviation Lawyers has in the past commented that “New Zealand
is led by Buddle Findlay who can call on the ‘excellent’ Frank Porter, the most highly nominated
lawyer in the country.” Who’s Who Legal recognizes Frank as a leading individual in aviation,
banking, project finance and procurement.
Anita Birkinshaw is a senior associate in Buddle Findlay’s litigation team and has extensive
experience in commercial dispute resolution. She has provided advice to various leading inter-
national airlines in relation to matters such as competition law, consumer protection legislation
and liability under the Warsaw and Montreal regimes. Anita has a Master of Laws degree from the
Sorbonne University, Paris, France. Following her post-graduate studies, she worked as a litigator
for leading international law firms in Paris and London.
Rishalat Khan is a senior associate in Buddle Findlay’s aviation team. She has considerable
experience in aircraft matters particularly the leasing and financing of aircraft. Rishalat has
considerable knowledge on Cape Town Convention matters and has also been involved with
major private debt placements in the U.S. market by Australasian airlines. In addition, Rishalat
has advised airlines on general corporate and commercial matters and has a particular interest in
liability issues under the Montreal Convention.
AJUMOGOBIA & OKEKE
Patrick A. Osu is a partner in the law firm of Ajumogobia & Okeke, a leading commercial law firm
in Nigeria. Patrick is a skilled litigator and experienced corporate lawyer. He has been involved in
active legal practice for twenty years since his call to the Nigerian Bar.
Patrick specializes in aircraft and aviation matters and other commercial and corporate law areas
of law. He leads the firm’s aviation team and has been actively involved in the provision of legal
advisory services for leasing and financing aircraft to owners and lenders globally for about ten
years, and contributes to the Nigerian chapters on Aircraft Finance and Aircraft Liens which are
published by Longman and Sweet & Maxwell respectively.
He has also worked on a sizeable amount of acquisition transactions. His hands on experience in
various Federal Government Privatization initiatives are invaluable. He is a member of the Nigerian
Bar Association and an Associate of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators UK (Nigerian Branch)
and the International Aviation Lawyers.
Kate I. Onianwa is a senior associate in the firm and a member of the Corporate & Commercial
and Aircraft & Aviation practice groups.
Kate has worked in and gained valuable experience from the corporate and litigation divisions of
the firm. She has practical experience in legal, regulatory and corporate governance matters, and
particularly aircraft/aviation transactions. She advises on foreign investment in Nigeria, renders
New Zealand
Nigeria
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
140
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
general legal advisory services to both individual and corporate clients and has been involved in
due diligence exercises for local and foreign entities.
Kate is a member of the firm’s aviation team and has been actively involved in the provision of legal
advisory services for leasing and financing aircraft to owners and lenders globally for about eight
years. She contributes to the Nigerian chapters on Aircraft Finance and Aircraft Liens which are
published by Longman and Sweet & Maxwell respectively.
She is a member of number of professional societies including the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
UK (Nigerian Branch) and the Chartered Institute of Taxation of Nigeria.
ARNTZEN DE BESCHE ADVOKATFIRMA AS
Paul Sveinsson is partner and Head of the Banking and Finance department in Arntzen de Besche.
He has wide experience as advisor to and counsel for Norwegian and foreign banks and finance
institutions, listed and private companies in connection with banking, financing transactions
and regulatory matters. Paul has extensive experience within the aviation and aircraft industry
relating to Norway. His work also comprises litigation, mainly in the areas of banking, finance and
insolvency, and appointments as an arbitrator.
Atle Stensrud is a senior lawyer of the Banking and Financing department in Arntzen de Besche.
He has long experience in advising foreign banks and financing institutions, listed and private
companies in connection with, in particular, aircraft financing transactions, Norwegian bond issues,
acquisition financing and financing transactions in the oil and energy industry.
TROWERS & HAMLINS LLP
Roger Clarke has previously lived and worked in Oman for a number of years and a significant portion
of his practice continues to be related to the Omani market. He advises lessors, banks and operators on
a range of asset finance (including aviation finance) transactions. One of his recent deals has involved
acting for newly established Oman based operating lessor, Oman Brunei Asset Management Company
(OBAM), on the initial acquisition, financing and leasing of three new B737-900ERs by an Isle of
Man incorporated SPV (with bank funding from DVB Bank) and again in a second transaction, the
acquisition, financing and leasing of two new Boeing B737-900ER aircraft (with bank funding from Arab
Banking Corporation) on long-term operating leases to Omani flag carrier, Oman Air. The DVB funded
aircraft were delivered in November 2014, March 2015 and November 2015 and the two ABC funded
Aircraft in May 2015. Roger is recognized in Chambers Global 2015 as a ‘Foreign Expert (Based Abroad)’
with particular reference to his responsiveness and experience (http://www.chambersandpartners.
com/165/242/editorial/2/6#425_editorial). Roger is the author of the Oman chapter in Aircraft Finance
(McBain) and the Oman chapter in Aircraft Liens and Detention Rights (McBain). Roger was also
included in Who’s Who Legal: Transport 2016 as a leading lawyer in the Aviation section.
KABRAJI & TALIBUDDIN
Kairas N. Kabraji read law at Trinity College, Cambridge and is an Advocate of the High Court
in Pakistan and has been practicing corporate and commercial law for close to forty years. He has
been practicing aircraft finance and leasing for most of that time including all major transactions
for Pakistan International Airlines’ lessors and lenders. He was the resource person advising on
the implementation of the Cape Town Convention and Aircraft Protocol in Pakistan’s domestic
law. Mr. Kabraji has also acted in numerous commercial transactions of all kinds, contentious
and non-contentious, both domestic and trans-border, including joint ventures, inward foreign
investment, mergers and acquisitions, domestic and global, capital markets transactions, foreign
and domestic debt and equity financings.
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
141
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Syed Ali bin Maaz is a partner at the firm and has worked on various corporate and commercial
matters, contentious and non-contentious, advising in a wide range of commercial transactions
including project finance and banking, debt and equity financing, mergers and acquisitions, foreign
exchange regulations, enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, insider trading, and aviation financing
and aircraft leasing, notably in the following aviation matters: Has advised the Aviation Working
Group on the implementation and functioning of the Cape Town Convention in Pakistan Law and
has advised a number of foreign firms and leasing corporations on the sale of aircraft to private
commercial airlines in Pakistan with a focus on the structure of the transaction, registration of
international security interests, filings with the Civil Aviation Authority, and protection of interests
in the aircraft under Pakistan law.
ASHURST
Richard Flynn is a lead partner in Ashurst’s corporate practice in Papua New Guinea. Richard
is a “hands on” commercial practitioner with a broad range of experience in M&A, corporate
restructuring, project finance and capital markets.
Richard is recognized as a leading individual by Chambers Global and is described as impressing
clients with his “commercially-focused advice”, that he “always protects his clients’ interests and
works to be co-operative instead of adversarial” and is a “great corporate and commercial lawyer,
who does excellent work”.
RODRIGO, ELIAS & MEDRANO, ABOGADOS
Jorge Velarde is the head partner of Rodrigo, Elias & Medrano’s Insurance and Reinsurance practice
group, as well as of the Firm’s Aviation practice. He has an exceptional professional background in
insurance and reinsurance law, as well as in aviation and transport law. Jorge´s expertise extends
to claims handling, both through negotiation and through the judicial, extrajudicial and arbitral
defense of clients, with major insurers and reinsurers between his clients. A distinguished member
of the Iberoamerican Institute of Air and Space Law and Commercial Aviation, Mr. Velarde
represents interests of owners and financial entities in sales, mortgages, leases and other means
of supplying airplanes to airplane operators.
Fernando Hurtado de Mendoza is highly regarded for having a full comprehension of the inter-
national and local aviation regulation, enabling him to serve the dierent agents involved in the
aviation industry. He renders advice to lenders, export credit agencies, wide-body aircraft owners,
narrow-body aircraft lessors, among others. Helicopter operators, aircraft maintenance facilities,
cargo carriers, aircraft insurers and reinsurers are also among his clients. Fernando is also highly
regarded for his involvement on claims’ handling related to aircraft accidents involving local and
foreign victims. The settlement of over 30 claims involving personal accident, liability and cargo
policies stand on their own. Knowledgeable of the Asian market as per his professional ties with
such region, being Singapore, an aviation hub, where he obtained his Masters degree, Fernando
Hurtado de Mendoza is vice-chair of the Cross-Border Investment Committee in the Inter-Pacific
Bar Association.
Papua New
Guinea
Peru
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
142
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
SPACZYŃSKI, SZCZEPANIAK I WSPÓLNICY (SSW)
Piotr Spaczyński is a partner at SSW, attorney (radca prawny) and advises clients from regulated
sectors including the aviation sector, including air carriers, ground handling agents, airport
managers, contractors of air carriers, aerospace organizations and associations, manufacturers
of aircraft and aircraft parts in a wide range of issues related to their business and operations.
He represents aviation clients in proceedings before the Civil Aviation Authority, the Oce of
Competition and Consumer Protection, the Inspector General for Personal Data Protection, the
Public Procurement Oce and in other legal proceedings (including sta matters). Piotr has been
recognized in number of international independent rankings like Chambers Europe, Legal 500
and IFLR.
Filip Balcerzak is a senior associate at SSW, attorney (adwokat, abogado), with an LL.M. from
the University of Ottawa and a Ph.D. from Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań. He provides
legal services for international clients on issues related to foreign investments. Filip is involved in
international arbitration proceedings and domestic litigations. He assists air carriers in negotiating
and drafting agreements with their contractors, such as aircraft manufacturers, travel agencies
and catering companies. He advised on transactions concerning leasing and financing of aircraft
and assisted, in this respect, both foreign and local entities.
TUCA ZBARCEA & ASOCIATII
Caˇtaˇ lin Băiculescu is a partner at Tuca Zbarcea & Asociatii and specializes in corporate law,
mergers & acquisitions and Romanian privatizations, being recognized as an expert in the due
diligence process, the negotiation of assets and share-purchase agreements, as well as post-acqui-
sition restructuring matters. He is also highly skilled in banking & finance, where he has advised
on banking regulatory legal issues and compliance, syndicated loans, project finance transactions
and bank restructuring and privatization. In addition, he assisted international aircraft owners
and financing banks in connection with aircraft lease agreements and mortgage agreements signed
with local airlines. Other areas of practice are electronic communications & IT, entertainment and
media law.
Roxana Pană is a senior associate at Tuca Zbarcea & Asociatii and specializes in banking and finance,
advising on a significant number of financing transactions, as well as advising on consumer lending,
telecommunication, certain aspects of capital markets and derivatives, doubled by involvement in
insolvency related matters. In addition, she assisted international financers and lessors of passenger
aircraft in connection with lease agreements, repossession and deregistration aspects regarding
aircrafts leased to Romanian aircraft operators, legal issues pertaining to the lease of aircraft engines
to Romanian aircraft operators, sale of certain aircraft spare parts, matters of aircraft title transfer,
financing and acquisition of certain aircraft.
RODIN VADIYAN SHURYGIN LLC
Alexander Rodin is a co-founder of RVS LLC and the managing partner of the firm. Alexander
specializes in dispute resolution, intellectual property and asset finance and advises both Russian
and major international clients on various issues of Russian law. Alexander acted as the leading
counsel in a number of notable court processes in Russia and abroad representing Russian state
companies, international credit institutions, oil companies and private investors. Alexander’s
involvement in asset finance transactions is not limited to Russian deals but also comprises major
international transactions. Alexander is a native Russian speaker and is also fluent in English and
Spanish.
Poland
Romania
Russia
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
143
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Alexander Shurygin, Ph.D., LL.M., is a partner in RVS LLC specializing primarily in the areas
of corporate, aircraft and shipping finance, bankruptcy and international arbitration. Alexander
advises Russian and major international clients in a considerable number of cross-border corporate
transactions and shipping finance deals. Alexander’s involvement in bankruptcy procedures
comprises some of the biggest Russian bankruptcy processes where he acted as the counsel of
Russian and foreign banks and investors. Alexander is a native Russian speaker and is fluent in
English and French.
ENSAFRICA
Désiré Kamanzi is the head of the Rwanda oce of ENSafrica. Désiré is ranked as a leading lawyer
by Chambers and Partners Global Guide to the World’s Leading Lawyers 2016, 2015, 2014 and 2013
General Business Law Rwanda-Band 1 and IFLR 1000 Financial and Corporate Guide: Leading
Lawyer 2016, 2015. According to Chambers and Partners Global Guide to the World’s Leading
Lawyers 2016, Désiré “has a lot of experience and is able to understand things on an international
as well as local level.” The Rwanda oce of ENSafrica is widely acclaimed in and outside Rwanda
in the areas of business law, acquisitions, banking and finance, assisting international / non-gov-
ernmental organizations, company law and corporate governance.
ODVETNIKI ŠELIH & PARTNERJI, O.P., D.O.O.
Mia Kalaš is a partner with Odvetniki Šelih & partnerji, o.p., d.o.o. with experience in acting for
domestic and foreign banks and other financial institutions, corporations and other legal entities.
She practices in the following areas: corporate and commercial law; mergers and acquisitions;
real estate and construction; banking and finance; capital markets; energy and environmental law.
Blaž Ogorevc is a partner with Odvetniki Šelih & partnerji, o.p., d.o.o. most experienced in real estate
transactions and financing as well as in other transactions involving domestic and foreign banks
and other financial institutions, corporations and other legal entities. He practices in the following
areas: corporate and commercial law; mergers and acquisitions; real estate and construction;
banking and finance; and insolvency and restructuring.
ENSAFRICA
Sean Lederman is a director at ENSafrica and is joint head of the firm’s banking and finance
department. Sean specializes in leveraged finance, asset finance and other forms of debt finance
transactions, including corporate debt. His rankings reflect his position as one of the leading
finance lawyers in South Africa. Sean’s areas of deep specialization include aircraft finance and
he is recognized as the foremost lawyer for aircraft financing transactions in South Africa. Sean
has advised on the majority of the large transactions (including operating lease and export credit
finance transactions) that have occurred in this area in South Africa over the past two and a half
decades. Sean is also particularly known for his work on leveraged finance transactions, including in
the private equity space. Sean has acted for both lenders and borrowers in this area and his clients
include local and foreign banks, corporate borrowers, private equity houses, operating lessors,
airlines and foreign law firms. ENSafrica has a significant breadth and depth of experience and
specialist expertise that spans all commercial areas of law, tax, forensics and IP, and benchmarks
itself according to international standards while retaining a uniquely African focus.
Rwanda
Slovenia
South Africa
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
144
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
LASANTHA HETTIARACHCHI & ASSOCIATES
Lasantha Hettiarachchi was admitted to practice in 1989 as an Attorney-at-Law of the Supreme
Court of Sri Lanka. Lasantha received his Master of Laws (LL.M) at the Institute of Air & Space
Law in McGill University, Montreal, Canada in 1992. Presently, Lasantha is reading for the Doctor
of Civil Laws also at the Institute of Air & Space Law at McGill University.
Having commenced his career in private practice in 1989, Lasantha served as Manager of
International Relations of a national airline from 1993 until 1994 and thereafter as Manager of
Legal in a leading Investment Bank until 1996. Reverting to private practice in 1996, Lasantha
established the present Law Chambers (Lasantha Hettiarachchi & Associates) specializing in
commercial, corporate, civil and aviation law. Lasantha is frequently consulted on aviation matters
by domestic and international airlines, aircraft financiers, lessors, airline passengers, cargo agents,
insurance companies and airline consumers in Sri Lanka. Since 1993, he has served as an external
independent Legal Consultant to the Civil Aviation Authority of Sri Lanka and has also been
involved in drafting of the Civil Aviation Act and subsidiary legislation relating to zoning and
licensing of service providers in Sri Lanka.
Piyum Dassanayake was admitted to practice in 1994 as an Attorney-at-Law of the Supreme Court
of Sri Lanka, and was admitted to practice as a Solicitor in the United Kingdom in 2004.
Piyum joined the firm in 2007 and has been involved in aviation related assignments from the
commencement of her services with the firm. She is currently in charge of the Aviation practice
of the firm and is responsible for advice, negotiating and drafting all aviation related contract and
agreements for the clients of the firm including aircraft acquisitions and leases.
LENZ & STAEHELIN
Olivier Stahler specializes in banking and finance law. He has an extensive expertise in finance
transactions, including aircraft leasing. He acts for a broad range of Swiss and foreign financial
institutions and corporate borrowers, both in a domestic and international context. Olivier is
also involved in the structuring of financial products, and in particular private equity funds and
hedge funds. Further, he provides regulatory advice in the context of the granting of licenses
for banks, securities dealers and collective investment schemes by the Swiss financial market
supervisory authority. Considered a leading individual by the Legal 500 in 2016, Olivier has been
named exclusive recipient of the International Law Oce (ILO) 2016 Client Choice Awards for
Banking in Switzerland. Olivier is further recognized in Chambers Global (2016), Chambers (Europe
2016) and Who’s Who Legal (2016).
Emilie Jacot-Guillarmod is a member of Lenz & Staehelin’s Corporate and M&A group in Geneva.
She regularly advises clients on corporate matters, M&A transactions and financings. Her expertise
covers in particular international finance and leasing.
RUSSIN & VECCHI
Thomas H. McGowan is a senior U.S. licensed attorney with over thirty years of Taiwanese
experience, all with Russin and Vecchi, a long established Taiwanese law firm with extensive
experience in all aspects of financial services including aircraft related financing, enforcement
and insolvency proceedings. His practice focuses on financial services and financing transactions
including aircraft financing acting for lenders, lessors and airlines.
H. Y. Cho is a senior professional with over 30 years of financial services and transaction experience
in both aircraft and vessel financing.
Sri Lanka
Switzerland
Taiwan
(Republic of China)
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
145
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
ERSOY BILGEHAN LAWYERS & CONSULTANTS
Ali Kartal was born in Istanbul in 1961. He obtained his law degree in 1984 at the Ankara University
Faculty of Law in Ankara, Turkey. He completed his training at the AYBAY & AYBAY Law Firm
and was admitted to the Istanbul Bar in 1987. He worked as in-house counsel for IBM Turkey
between 1989 and 1993. In 1994 and 1995 he attended flight schools in Turkey and the USA and
obtained his commercial pilot license, instrument rating, multi-engine rating and flight instructor
certificate. He worked as a flight instructor in the USA for a brief period. Upon his return to Turkey
he worked as a private practitioner until 2002. In 2002 he joined the AYBAY & AYBAY Law Firm as
a partner. His practice and experience is focused on commercial law, law of obligations, maritime
law, aviation law and insurance law. He has extensive experience in litigation. He is bilingual in
Turkish and English. He is a court accredited expert witness on aviation matters. He joined Ersoy
Bilgehan as a partner in June 2016.
JURVNESHERVICE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL SERVICES
Anna Tsirat (Dr.) is a partner and head of aviation, aerospace, and transportation practice at
Jurvneshervice International Legal Services. She acts as counsel to foreign lenders/lessors and
other aviation companies including AerCap, Cessna/Textron, ELFC, GECAS, Macquarie AirFinance,
Willis Lease Finance Corporation, Apollo, Ex-Im Bank of USA, Erste Group Bank AG and many
others. Dr. Tsirat also specializes in the areas of international trade (agency, distribution and
franchising agreements); litigation and dispute resolution; protection of foreign investments;
corporate law and tax planning and tax disputes. Dr. Tsirat is a member of International Bar
Association, Kyiv Region Bar, Center for International Legal Studies (Zaltsburg, Austria). Dr. Tsirat
graduated from Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv specializing in commercial law
and the Romano-Germanic Philology Department specializing in English literature and language.
She attended study courses at the Institute of International Law Development (IDLI) in Rome.
Dr. Tsirat is an author of almost 100 publications on franchising, aircraft financing and aviation,
civil procedure, joint ventures and intellectual property. She is an author of chapters on Ukraine
in Aircraft Finance: Registration, Security and Enforcement under general editor G.McBain since
2006, The Aviation Law Review under editor Sean Gates from 2013 and in the 11th edition of Getting
the Deal Through – Air Transport 2016.
AL JALLAF ADVOCATES & LEGAL CONSULTANTS
Amna Al Jallaf, described by some as the “Queen of Aviation,” is recognized internationally as one
of the Middle East’s leading Aviation Law and Islamic Finance specialists. Amna began her career as
the first Emirati and Arabic speaking legal counsel at Emirates. In 1999, she founded the UAE’s first
specialist aviation Al Jallaf Advocates & Legal Consultants. Amna has been appointed to a number of
prestigious institutions, including the Legal Advisory Panel of the AWG. She has served as a Member
of the Board at the Dubai Chamber of Commerce for over 10 years and is a Member of the Board of
Directors for the Awqaf and Minors Aairs Foundation. Amna holds an LL.M. from the Washington
College of Law, American University, Washington DC, and is a licensed UAE Advocate. She advises on
all aspects of national and international aviation law and regulations, including on both contentious
and non-contentious matters. Al Jallaf Advocates & Legal Consultants is one of the UAE’s premier
commercial law boutiques. Comprising a diverse team of internationally qualified lawyers, the firm
advises and represents local and international clients on various litigation and commercial matters
with a focus on aviation law.
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab
Emirates
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
146
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
Jeremy A. Brown qualified as a barrister in London (Middle Temple, 2009), where he spent
a number of years in private and employed practice before moving to the UAE to join Al Jallaf
Advocates & Legal Consultants. He has a wealth of international legal experience having acted
and advised in cases covering the MENA region and numerous jurisdictions around the world.
Jeremy holds a First Class LL.B. (Hons) and an LL.M. with Distinction from the renowned School
of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London. He later joined the School of Law at
SOAS as a Teaching Fellow, teaching both undergraduate and postgraduate law. Jeremy is a Door
Tenant at Coram Chambers in London.
PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
Debra Erni is the Managing Partner of Pillsbury’s London oce and a member of the firm’s Asset
Finance practice, with a particular focus on international asset finance, leasing and trading, partic-
ularly for the aviation industry. Based in London with significant client followings in California and
Japan, Debra has represented several of the world’s largest aircraft and engine leasing companies,
financiers, airlines and manufacturers in connection with the sale and purchase of new and used
aviation assets, ECA-supported financings, secured debt, operating and tax-based lease financings,
securitizations, and the formation and unwind of joint venture leasing platforms. Formerly
resident in Japan for nearly a decade, Debra speaks and reads Japanese fluently and is familiar
with Japanese corporate structures and many other aspects of Japanese law, regularly acting as
a trusted advisor to a number of major trading houses. She has also spent time on secondment at
AerCap’s Amsterdam oce. Debra has been recognized in Chambers UK, Asset Finance: Aviation
Finance (2016), Euromoney’s Expert Guides – Aviation Lawyers (2013-2016), Euromoney’s Expert
Guides – Women in Business Law (2013-2016), Who’s Who Legal Transport: Aviation Finance
(2016) and Legal 500 Asset Finance and Leasing (2014-2016) – the latter publication citing her
as “experienced, knowledgeable and attentive” and together with the London oering as “having
made impressive market penetration in a relatively short period.”
Graham Tyler is the leader of Pillsbury’s London oce Finance practice and is a co-leader of the
firm’s Asset Finance practice. He is a recognized expert in aircraft finance and regularly advises
clients that include major airlines, financial institutions and lessors on the procurement of new and
used aircraft and engines and the cross border leasing and financing of those aircraft and engines,
utilizing a variety of structures including operating leases, finance leases, export credit supported
transactions, capital markets Islamic finance and tax-based and structured finance products. Graham
has also worked on deals involving other assets, including ships/oshore equipment rolling stock
and yellow goods. Both Chambers and Legal 500 rate Graham and his team highly for their work in
this sector. He is also listed as an aviation expert in Euromoney’s Expert Guide - Aviation Lawyers.
Graham is recognized in Chambers UK, Asset Finance (2016) as “solution driven and skillful in
negotiations,” and in Legal 500 UK, Asset Finance & Leasing (2014-2016) as a “leading industry
figure.” Graham has also been recognized in Chambers Global, Aviation: Finance - Global-wide (2016).
PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP
Mark Lessard is a partner in Pillsbury’s New York oce and is the Global Head of the firm’s
Finance practice, primarily representing clients who are active in the Aviation, Aerospace and
Transportation sectors. Mr. Lessard represents lenders, lessors, investors, operators, underwriters,
liquidity providers, manufacturers, rating agencies and trustees in connection with all forms
of transportation asset-backed financings, including term loans and revolving credit facilities,
operating leases, leveraged and tax leases, as well as private placements and other capital markets
oerings, such as portfolio securitizations, EETCs and debt repackagings. Mr. Lessard has particular
experience in cross-border transactions, having placed, financed or repossessed aviation assets in
dozens of jurisdictions around the world. He is an active member of the Legal Advisory Panel to
United Kingdom
United States
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
147
ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS
the Aviation Working Group, which has been at the forefront of the adoption and implementation
of the Cape Town Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment. Mr. Lessard is a
Member of the Legal Advisory Panel to Aviation Working Group (2012-present), and is recognized
in the following publications: Chambers USA, Aviation Finance—National (2009-2016); Legal 500
US, Asset Finance and Leasing (2010, 2013-2016); International Who’s Who of Aviation Lawyers
(2010-2013); Who’s Who Legal, Aviation—New York (2010, 2012, 2014-2016); and Guide to the
World’s Leading Aviation Lawyers, Euromoney/Legal Media Group (2013).
Leo T. Crowley is a partner in the law firm’s Insolvency & Restructuring practice and is located in the
New York oce. He is the immediate former leader of the firm’s Insolvency & Restructuring Practice
and a current member of the firm’s Board. Previously he served as co-leader and leader of the firm’s
Litigation Section and he has also led and served on a number of other firm committees. Mr. Crowley
has extensive experience in all fora, including Federal District Court; Federal Bankruptcy Court; the
United States Circuit Courts of Appeal; New York State Supreme Court; the New York State Appellate
Division; New York State Court of Appeals; federal and state administrative agencies; and arbitration
and mediation tribunals. His practice is devoted primarily to creditors’ rights and health care. Mr.
Crowley is recognized as a leading U.S. bankruptcy/restructuring lawyer by Chambers USA, a guide
that ranks law firms and lawyers throughout the world based on independent reviews from clients
and peers. Mr. Crowley is also recognized in the following publications: Chambers USA, Bankruptcy/
Restructuring—New York (2009-2012); and Legal 500 US, Insolvency & Restructuring (2014).
VILAF
Duyen, Vo Ha has been a Partner at VILAF, which is one of the largest business law firms in
Vietnam, since January 2001 and worked with two American law firms in Ho Chi Minh City and
Washington DC prior to joining VILAF. Duyen advises foreign investors, private equity funds,
issuers and financial institutions in relation to equity investment, bond investment and debt
instruments in private and public companies in Vietnam. Some of Duyen’s transactions include,
among others, KKR’s investment in Masan Consumer, Mondelez International’s acquisition of
Kinh Do Corporation, Hoang Anh Gia Lai’s international bond listing transaction and several
bond restructuring transactions, Dragon Capital in an investment in a mining project, Bluescope
Steel in relation to its Vietnam subsidiaries in a global M&A transaction, Shell in various M&A
transactions in its downstream business in Vietnam and CPECC in the joint venture acquisition
Jaks Hai Duong BOT Power Project.
Vietnam
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
148
Third Party Data Notes
OECD data is provided courtesy of OECD, all rights reserved. High-Income or Zero-Rated data is as
of October 28, 2016. ASU Cape Town Discount data is as of May 30, 2016. Source material available at
http://www.oecd.org/tad/xcred/ctc.htm and http://www.oecd.org/tad/xcred/cre-crc-current-english.pdf.
Standard & Poor’s data is as of September 22, 2016, and is provided courtesy of Standard & Poor’s, all rights
reserved.
Moody’s data is as of October 3, 2016, and is provided courtesy of Moody’s, all rights reserved.
World Economic Forum data is as of September 22, 2015, and is provided courtesy of World Economic Forum,
all rights reserved. Source: The Global Competitiveness Report, World Economic Forum, Switzerland,
2015-2016.
World Justice Project data is as of October 20, 2016, and is provided courtesy of the World Justice Project,
all rights reserved. Source material is available at http://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index.
Heritage Foundation data is as of February 1, 2016, and is provided courtesy of the Heritage Foundation, all
rights reserved. Source material is available at http://www.heritage.org/index Terry Miller and Anthony B. Kim,
2016 Index of Economic Freedom (Washington, DC: The Heritage Foundation and Dow Jones & Company,
Inc., 2016), http://www.heritage.org/index.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
149
Appendix:
APPENDIX:30-MINUTE(CHECK-BOX)JURISDICTIONALQUESTIONNAIRE
©PillsburyWinthropShawPittmanLLP
pillsburylaw.com
WorldAircraftRepossessionIndex
97
GeneralInformation
GuidanceNotes
Repossession
Box1
GuidanceNotes
Self-helpremedies
(a)
(b)
(c)
Taxesandfees
(d)
QUESTIONNAIRECONTINUESONNEXTPAGE…
PleasenotetheDISCLAIMERonpage7
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Anexampleofsuchataxmightinclude
astamptaxpayableasaconditiontoadmittingdocumentsin
evidenceforthepurposesofarepossession(whereself-help
remediesarenotavailable).Weleaveittoyourdiscretionto
determineiffeesaresignificant;however,“
significant
”feesor
taxeswouldincludeanyfeesortaxesassessedonapercentage
basisagainstthevalueoftheaircraftorthesumsecuredbya
mortgage,etc.,butwouldexcludenominalfeesornominaltaxes
amountingtolessthanUS$1,000oritsequivalentinthelocal
currency.
Selectthecountryfromthedrop-downbox
Contactname#1:
Arethereany“significant”
taxesorfees
payableinyourcountryorunderthelawsof
yourjurisdictiononrepossessionofthe
aircraft,oronapplyingforacourtorderfor
repossessionoftheaircraft?
30-Minute(Check-Box)JurisdictionalQuestionnaire
Listthefullnameofthefirmand,ifapplicable,thelocaloffice
completingthequestionnaire
Format:[monthinwords][dd][yyyy]
Typewhichjurisdiction(s)withinthecountryyourresponses
relateto.Includefederallawifapplicable
Maximumtwopersons,thefirstnamebeingtheleadlawyer
completingthequestionnaire.
Country:
Nameoflawfirm:
Applicable
jurisdiction(s):
Judicialproceedings:requirementforadeposit,bondor
othersecurity
Intheeventtheowner-lessorormortgagee
appliesforrepossessionorderinthecourts
ofyourjurisdiction,wouldthe
owner-lessor
ormortgageetypicallyberequiredto
depositabondorotherguarantee
withthe
court?
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".IfabondorguaranteeISNOT
typicallyrequiredbutMAYberequiredatthediscretionofthe
court,theanswertothisquestionshouldbe“NO”.If,ontheother
hand,abondorguaranteeIStypicallyrequiredbutMAYbe
waivedatthediscretionofthecourt,theanswertothisquestion
shouldbe“YES”.
Dateof
completion:
Position/title:
Emailaddress:
Contactname#2:
Position/title:
Emailaddress:
PillsburyWinthropShawPittmanLLP
Mayan
owner-lessor
exercise"self-help"
repossessionremediesinyourjurisdiction?
Maya
mortgagee
exercise"self-help"
repossessionremediesinyourjurisdiction?
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".(1)Youshouldassumethatthelease
hasbeenterminated(orthatthemortgagehasbecome
enforceable).(2)"
Self-help
"meansthatthelawsofyour
jurisdictionpermitanowner-lessor(and/ormortgagee)to
repossesstheaircraftfromanuncooperativelessee(ordebtor)
withouttheneedtoobtainacourtorder,providedthatitdoesso
peaceably,withoutusingforceorthethreatofforce.
Ifanyansweris"probablyyes"or"probablyno",then
youshouldanswer"YES"or"NO",respectively.
Byprovidinguswithyourcompletedquestionnaire,you
consenttousreproducingandpublishingagraphicofyour
firm'slogointhematerialspresentingtheresults.
Yourresponses,ifpresentedinabrochureforgeneral
distributiontothepublic,willbesubject
todisclaimer
languageprovidedtoyoutogetherwiththisquestionnaire.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
150
APPENDIX
APPENDIX:30-MINUTE(CHECK-BOX)JURISDICTIONALQUESTIONNAIRE
98
WorldAircraftRepossessionIndex
©PillsburyWinthropShawPittmanLLP
pillsburylaw.com
30-Minute(Check-Box)JurisdictionalQuestionnaire
(continued)
Repossession(contd…)
Box1(contd…)
GuidanceNotes
SpeedofRepossession
(e)
LegalCostofRepossession
(f)
Insolvency
Box2
Sophisticationofinsolvencylaws
(a)
(b)
QUESTIONNAIRECONTINUESONNEXTPAGE…
(1)Lessthanor
equalto
U.S.$50,000:
(3)inexcessof
U.S.$250,000,
butlessthanor
equalto
U.S.$1,000,000:
Moderatelyorwelldeveloped:
(4)inexcessof1
year:
Isthebodyofinsolvencylawinyourjurisdiction:
Undeveloped,underdevelopment,or
somewhatlimitedinitsdevelopment:
ANSWER"YES"TOONEOFTHETWOBOXES,LEAVINGTHE
OTHERONEBLANK.(1)Youranswershouldberestrictedto
insolvencylawasitrelatestotherightsofamortgagee(asa
creditor)andanowner-lessor(asacreditor/owner).(2)Your
answershouldtakeintoaccount(a)thefrequency,volumeand
historyofcaselawandanyapplicablelegalcommentaryonthe
subject,and(b)thesophisticationoftheapplicablestatutes.
Inyouropinionandestimation,whichofthebandsbelow
provides,onthebalanceofprobabilities,themost
accurateestimateofhowlongitmighttaketoobtainin
yourjurisdictionacourtorderforrepossessionof
theaircraft,followingcommencementofjudicial
proceedings?
(1)Lessthanor
equalto60
days:
(3)inexcessof
180days,but
lessthanor
equalto1year:
ANSWER"YES"TOONEOFTHEFOURBOXES,LEAVINGTHE
REMAINDERBLANK.Forthepurposesofyouranswer,(1)you
should ignoreanyself-helpremedies
thatmaybeavailableasan
alternativemeansofrepossession.Youshouldalsoassumethat
(2)themortgageeortheowner-lessoris ultimatelysuccessful,
(3)the proceedingsarecontested bythelessee(oraninsolvency
practitionerorbankruptcytrusteeonitsbehalf),butare
otherwisenotcontestedbyanycompetingcreditor,(4)where
judicialproceedingsareinstigatedbythemortgagee,ithasthe
cooperationoftheowner/lessor,(5)thereis alreadyeitheran
EnglishorNewYorkjudgmentoranarbitrationaward ordering
repossession(andyouranswershouldrepresentthequickestof
eitherlitigatingafreshonthemeritsorenforcingsuch
judgment/award),and(6)the lesseeisinsolvent
atsuchtimethe
proceedingsareinstituted.(7)Theproceedingsmayeitherbefor
a preliminary(i.e.interim)orafinalorder
,whicheverrepresents
thequickestinyourjurisdiction.
ANSWER"YES"TOONEOFTHEFOURBOXES,LEAVINGTHE
REMAINDERBLANK.Forthepurposesofyouranswer,(1)you
should ignoreanyself-helpremedies
thatmaybeavailableasan
alternativemeansofrepossession.(2)Theestimated legalcosts
shouldbeinclusiveofallcourtandlawyerfees incurredbythe
owner-lessorormortgagee(butwithoutdeductinganyamounts
thatrepresentanypotentialrecoveryofthosecosts).Youshould
alsoassumethat(3)themortgageeortheowner-lessoris
ultimatelysuccessful
,(4)the proceedingsarecontestedbythe
lessee (oraninsolvencypractitionerorbankruptcytrusteeonits
behalf),butareotherwisenotcontestedbyanycompeting
creditor,(5)wherejudicialproceedingsareinstigatedbythe
mortgagee,ithasthecooperationoftheowner/lessor,(6)there
is alreadyeitheranEnglishorNewYorkcourtjudgmentoran
arbitrationaward orderingrepossession(andyouranswer
shouldrepresenttheleastcostlyofeitherlitigatingafreshonthe
meritsorenforcingsuchjudgment/award),and(7)the lesseeis
insolvent atsuchtimetheproceedingsareinstituted.(8)The
proceedingsmayeitherbefora preliminary(i.e.interim)ora
finalorder ,whicheverrepresentstheleastcostlyinyour
jurisdiction.
(2)inexcessof
U.S.$50,000,but
lessthanorequal
toU.S.$250,000:
(4)inexcessof
U.S.$1,000,000:
Inyouropinionandestimation,whichofthebandsbelow
provides,onthebalanceofprobabilities,themost
accurateestimateofthelegalcostsofobtainingacourt
orderforrepossessionoftheaircraft,following
commencementofjudicialproceedings?
(2)inexcessof60
days,butless
thanorequalto
180days:
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
151
APPENDIX
APPENDIX:30-MINUTE(CHECK-BOX)JURISDICTIONALQUESTIONNAIRE
©PillsburyWinthropShawPittmanLLP
pillsburylaw.com
WorldAircraftRepossessionIndex
99
30-Minute(Check-Box)JurisdictionalQuestionnaire
(continued)
Insolvency(contd…)
Box2(contd…)
GuidanceNotes
Insolvencymoratorium
(c)
(d)
Overeachingoflessee'sinsolvencyestate
(e)
Registration
Box3
AircraftRegisterType
(a)
QUESTIONNAIRECONTINUESONNEXTPAGE…
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO"TOEACHBOX.(1)Ifyourcountry
allowsaircraftregistrationeitherinthenameofanowner(who
isnotalsotheoperator)orinthenameofanoperator(whois
notalsotheowner),thenyoushouldanswer"YES"tobothboxes.
(2)Thisquestionreferstoinwhosename,ataminimum,the
aircraftmaybeprincipallyregistered,NOTwhetherthereisan
option,inaddition,tonotetheinterestofaparticularpartyon
theaircraftregisteroronthecertificateofregistration.Thisis
addressedinthequestionbelow.
ANSWER"YES"TOONEOFTHETWOBOXES,LEAVINGTHE
OTHERONEBLANK.Youshouldcheckthe"certain/limited
circumstances"boxif,forexample,(1)yourcountryhasadopted
theCapeTownConvention(andAircraftProtocol)andhasopted
foradefinitewaitingperiodunder"AlternativeA"pursuantto
Article13oftheCapeTownConvention(andArticleXofthe
AircraftProtocol),butadifferent(longer)waitingperiodor
moratoriumappliesunderthelawsofyourcountryor
jurisdictionwheretheCapeTownConventiondoesnotapply,or
(2)wheretheindicatedmoratoriumperiodappliesonlytoaclass
oflessee/debtors,suchasairlinesholdinganairoperator's
certificate(withadifferent(longer)moratoriumapplyingto
otherpersons,suchasoperatinglessors).
(1)Inall
circumstances:
(2)Onlyin
certain(or
limited)
circumstances:
Doesthemoratoriumperiodgiveninyouranswerin(c)
aboveapply:
ANSWER"YES"TOONEOFTHEFOURBOXES,LEAVINGTHE
REMAINDERBLANK.Forthepurposesofyouranswer,(1)you
shouldassumethatthelessee(ordebtor)entityissubjecttothe
mandatorilyapplicableinsolvency/bankruptcylawsofyour
countryorjurisdiction.(2)If,inyourcountryorjurisdiction,the
fullextentofthemoratoriumperiodcannotbeknowninadvance
becausethelawtakesa variableor"ad-hoc"approachtothe
lengthofinsolvencymoratoria,thenyoushouldcheckthebox"in
excessof180days,orvariable" (ortheboxrepresentingthe
maximumlimit,ifthereisamaximum).If,ontheotherhand,the
lawofyourcountryorjurisdictiondoesprovideforadefinite
fixedperiod,butthatfixedperiodmaybeextendedwithleaveof
thecourt,youshouldchecktheboxwhichcorrespondstothat
fixedperiod,ignoringanypossiblediscretionaryextensions.(3)If,
underthelawofyourcountryorjurisdiction, morethanone
answermaybeapplicablebecausethemoratoriumperiodmay
vary dependingonthecircumstances(e.g.whetherornotthe
CapeTownConventionappliesorsomeothercriteriaaremet),
then youranswershouldreflectthemostfavorable(i.e.the
shortest)suchtimeperiod ,andyoushouldanswerquestion(d)
belowaccordingly.
Underthemandatorilyapplicablelawsofyourcountryor
yourjurisdiction,howlongistheperiodduringwhicha
moratoriummaybeimposedintheeventofalessee
(ordebtor)insolvency/bankruptcy,therebyadversely
affectingtherightsoftheowner-lessor(ormortgagee)to
repossesstheaircraftonterminationoftheleasingofthe
aircraft(orenforcementofthemortgage):
(3)inexcessof
180days,but
lessthanor
equalto1year:
(1)Lessthanor
equalto60
days:
(2)inexcessof60
days,butless
thanorequalto
180days:
(4)inexcessof1
year,orvariable:
Ifthelesseeisputintoadministration,
liquidationorsimilarbankruptcyor
insolvencyprocess,underthemandatorily
applicablelawsofyourcountryor
jurisdiction,willtheaircraftbedeemedto
bethelessee'spropertyandpartofits
bankruptcyorinsolvencyestate
(notwithstandingthattheowner-lessoris
thelegalowner)?
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Forthepurposesofyouranswer,you
shouldassumethat(1)thelessee(ordebtor)entityissubjectto
themandatorilyapplicableinsolvency/bankruptcylawsofyour
countryorjurisdiction,and(2)theleaseisatrueoperatinglease.
Mayanaircraftberegisteredinyourcountryinthename
of:
(1)theaircraft
operator,ifthe
operatorisnot
alsotheowner:
(2)theaircraft
owner,ifthe
ownerisnot
alsothe
operator:
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
152
APPENDIX
APPENDIX:30-MINUTE(CHECK-BOX)JURISDICTIONALQUESTIONNAIRE
100
WorldAircraftRepossessionIndex
©PillsburyWinthropShawPittmanLLP
pillsburylaw.com
30-Minute(Check-Box)JurisdictionalQuestionnaire
(continued)
Registration(contd...)
Box3(contd…)
GuidanceNotes
(b)
Maythefollowinginterestsalsobenotedonthe"register":
Convenienceofregistration
(c)
(d)
Deregistration
Box4
A
Thirdpartyrightstoderegister
(a)
(b)
Precedentofrefusingtoderegister
(c)
QUESTIONNAIRECONTINUESONNEXTPAGE…
Alternativecountry#1:
Alternativecountry#2:
Pleaseidentifyintheboxbelowthetwomostpopular
alternativecountries,ifany,inwhichaircraft
habituallybasedinyourcountryaretypically
registered,pursuanttoadelegationarrangement.
Willthelawsofyourjurisdictionand/orthe
localpracticeoftheaircraftregister/
aviationauthorityinyourcountry(subjectto
question(c)below)honoraunilateral
requestbythemortgageetode-register
theaircraftfromtheaircraftregister,
withoutthecooperationofthelessee?
Withrespecttoregistrationofanaircraft,
doestheaircraftregister/aviationauthority
inyourcountryrequireanydocumenttobe
notarizedand/orauthenticatedbeforeit
willacceptandprocesstheregistrationofan
aircraft,oranyleaseormortgageofan
aircraft?
(1)thatofthe
legalowner:
(2)thatofthe
mortgagee:
INEACHBOX,EITHERSELECTACOUNTRY,ORCHOOSE"N/A".
(1)If,inyourexperience,aircrafthabituallybasedinyour
countryaretypicallyregisteredinanothercountrypursuanttoa
delegationarrangementbetweenyourcountryandthatother
country,thenyoushouldindicatethishere.(2)Suchdelegation
arrangementstypicallymadepursuanttoaformal" 83bis
delegationagreement "undertheChicagoConvention,but
sometimesothertypesofbilateralarrangementsexistbetween
countries.
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Forthepurposesofyouranswer,(1)
"document"
includesanyapplicationformsnecessaryfor
registration,anynecessaryconsents,authorizationsor
supportingdocuments.(2) "Authenticated"
includesany
requirementthatadocumentbeapostilled,legalizedor
translated.
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".(1) "Register" meanseitherthe
aircraftregister,aseparategovernmentownership/mortgage
register,orontheaircraft'scertificateofregistration.(2)This
questionspeaksto additionalintereststhatmaybenoted,asan
option,ontheregister ,intheeventtheaircraftisregisteredin
thenameofsomeotherparty.(3)If,peryouranswerabove,the
aircraftmayONLYbeprincipallyregisteredinthenameofthe
owner(andnotalternativelyinthenameoftheoperator),then
youranswerto(b)(1)shouldbe"N/A".
Areyouawareofanyinstanceswherethe
aircraftregister/aviationauthorityin
yourcountryhasrefusedtohonora
requestbytheowner-lessorand/orthe
mortgagee(asapplicable)toderegisterthe
aircraft,despitebeingotherwiseentitledto
dosoasindicatedinyouranswersabove?
Willthelawsofyourjurisdictionand/orthe
localpracticeoftheaircraftregister/
aviationauthorityinyourcountry(subjectto
question(c)below)honoraunilateral
requestbytheowner-lessortode-register
theaircraftfromtheaircraftregister,
withoutthecooperationofthelessee?
ANSWER"N/A"TOTHISQUESTIONIFYOUANSWERED"NO"
TOBOTHQUESTIONS(a)AND(b)ABOVE.OTHERWISE
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO"TOTHISQUESTION.(1)Thisquestion
relatestoquestions(a)and/or(b)aboveonlytotheextentyou
answered"YES"tothosequestions.(2)"Despitebeingotherwise
entitledtodoso"meansthattheowner-lessor(ormortgagee),in
submittingthederegistrationrequest,hascompliedwiththelocal
lawandthepaperworkrequiredforderegistrationisotherwise
inorder.
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Forthepurposesofyouransweryou
shouldassumethat:(1)theowner-lessor(ormortgagee)has
repossessedtheaircraft,orisseekingsimultaneousrepossession
oftheaircraft;(2)theleasehasbeenterminated(orthatthe
mortgagehasbecomeenforceable);(3)whereanysuch
deregistrationrequestismadebyanowner-lessor,itiswiththe
consentofthemortgagee(ifany);and(4)"cooperationofthe
lessee"includesarequirementthattheoriginalofthecertificate
ofregistrationbesurrendered.Ifanoriginalofthecertificateof
registrationisrequiredasaconditiontode-registration,the
answertothisquestionshouldbe"NO".(5)Arequestmaybe
honoredeitherpursuantto(A)theexerciseofade-registration
powerofattorneyoranirrevocablede-registrationandexport
authorisation(IDERA)grantedinitsfavor,or(B)itsstatusas
owner-lessor(ormortgagee)oftheaircraft,evenwithoutany
suchpowerorIDERA.
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
153
APPENDIX
APPENDIX:30-MINUTE(CHECK-BOX)JURISDICTIONALQUESTIONNAIRE
©PillsburyWinthropShawPittmanLLP
pillsburylaw.com
WorldAircraftRepossessionIndex
101
30-Minute(Check-Box)JurisdictionalQuestionnaire
(continued)
Deregistration(contd…)
Box4(contd…)
GuidanceNotes
Convenienceofderegistration
(d)
Export
Box5
Lessee/debtorcooperation
(a)
(b)
Exportlicenses/permits
(c)
Taxesandfees
(d)
Judgments/Arbitration
Box6
Enforceabilityofjudgments
(a)
(b)
QUESTIONNAIRECONTINUESONNEXTPAGE…
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Forthepurposesofyouranswer,you
shouldassumethat:(1)theowner-lessor(ormortgagee)has
repossessedandde-registeredtheaircraft,orisseeking
simultaneousrepossessionandde-registrationoftheaircraft,(2)
theleasinghasterminated(orthemortgagehasbecome
enforceable),and(3)theowner-lessor(ormortgagee)hasan
exportpowerofattorneygrantedinitsfavor,butthatthelessee
(ordebtor)isinsolventanduncooperativeatthetimetheowner-
lessor(ormortgagee)isseekingtoexporttheaircraftfromyour
country.
Withrespecttoderegistrationofanaircraft,
doestheaircraftregister/aviationauthority
inyourcountryrequireanydocumenttobe
notarizedand/orauthenticatedbeforeit
willacceptandprocessthederegistrationof
anaircraft?
Isanyexportlicenseorpermitrequiredor
arethereanyotherrestrictionsontheability
ofanowner-lessorormortgageetoexport
theaircraftfromyourcountry?
Mayanowner-lessor(withtheconsentofthe
mortgagee,ifany)unilaterallyexportthe
aircraftfromyourcountrywithoutthe
cooperationofthelessee?
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Ifenforcementofajudgmentrendered
byaNewYorkorEnglishcourt(asapplicable)wouldbesubject
tothesatisfactionofoneormoreofthe thresholdconditions
ENUMERATEDONTHENEXTPAGE ,but wouldnotbesubject
toanyotherconditions ,thentheanswertothisquestionshould
be“YES”;ifenforcementwouldbesubjecttothesatisfactionofa
thresholdcondition thatisNOTincludedinthelistofthreshold
conditions setoutonthenextpage,thentheanswertothis
questionshouldbe“NO”.Forthepurposesofyouranswer,you
should assumethat"enforcement"meanstheenforcementof
moneyawardsonly (andnotinjunctiveoranyothertypeofnon-
monetaryrelief).
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Forthepurposesofyouranswer,you
shoulddisregardanyrestrictionsrelatingtotheexportofgoods
tocountriessubjecttosanctionsorwithrespecttoclassifiedor
militaryequipmentinstalledontheaircraft.
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Weleaveittoyourdiscretionto
determineiffeesaresignificant;however,“ significant
”feesor
taxeswouldincludeanyfeesortaxesassessedonapercentage
basisagainstthevalueoftheaircraftorthesumsecuredbya
mortgage,etc.,butwouldexcludenominalfeesornominaltaxes
amountingtolessthanUS$1,000oritsequivalentinthelocal
currency.
Subjecttocertainpermittedthreshold
conditionsbeingmet,willthecourtsofyour
jurisdictionrecognizeandenforcea
judgmentrenderedbyaNewYorkstateor
U.S.federalcourtsittinginNewYork,without
thecasebeingre-examinedonitsmerits?
Subjecttocertainpermittedthreshold
conditionsbeingmet,willthecourtsofyour
jurisdictionrecognizeandenforcea
judgmentrenderedbyanEnglishcourt,
withoutthecasebeingre-examinedonits
merits?
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Forthepurposesofyouranswer,(1)
"document"
includesanyapplicationformsnecessaryfor
registration,anynecessaryconsents,authorizationsor
supportingdocuments.(2) "Authenticated"
includesany
requirementthatadocumentbeapostilled,legalizedor
translated.
Mayamortgageeunilaterallyexportthe
aircraftfromyourcountrywithoutthe
cooperationoftheownerorthelessee?
Arethereany“significant”taxesorfees
payableinyourcountryorunderthelawsof
yourjurisdictiononexportoftheaircraft
fromyourcountry?
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
154
APPENDIX
APPENDIX:30-MINUTE(CHECK-BOX)JURISDICTIONALQUESTIONNAIRE
102
WorldAircraftRepossessionIndex
©PillsburyWinthropShawPittmanLLP
pillsburylaw.com
30-Minute(Check-Box)JurisdictionalQuestionnaire
(continued)
GuidanceNotes(permittedthresholdconditionsforenforcementofjudgments)
Judgments/Arb.(contd…)
Box6(contd…)
GuidanceNotes
Enforceabilityofarbitralawards
(c)
PreferentialLiens
Box7
Unusualoronerouspreferentialliens
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO"toallquestionsinthisbox.
(a)
(b)
(c)
QUESTIONNAIRECONTINUESONNEXTPAGE…
Dothelawsofyourjurisdictionprovidefor
anynon-consensualpreferentialliensand/or
equivalentrightsorrightsofdetentionover
aircraftthatcouldariseinfavorofalessee
ordebtor,notrequiringanyformof
registration?
Anexampleofsuchlienmightincludeanon-consensual
preferentiallienovertheaircraftarisingbyoperationoflawin
favorofalesseeincircumstanceswherethelesseehasavalid
counterclaimagainsttheowner-lessor.
(1)A" preferential "lienmeansalienthatwouldtakepriority
overtheowner/lessor’sownershipand/oramortgagee’s
securedcreditorrightsintheaircraft.(2)A“ fleet-wide
”lien
meansalienthathasarisenasaresultofunpaidamounts
attributabletoaparticularaircraftinanoperator’sfleet,buthas
attachedoris capableofattachingtoanyotheraircraftinthat
operator’sfleet (i.e.anyotheraircraftoperatedbythat
operator),regardlessofthefactthattheownersofsuchaircraft
maybedifferent.(3)Forthepurposesofquestion(b)only,
examplesofthirdpartynon-consensualpreferentialliensinclude:
(A)liensinfavorofarepairerormechanic,(B)liensinfavorof
anairportauthorityforunpaidnavigation,landingorsimilar
charges,(C)liensinfavorofalandlord(hangar-keeper)for
unpaidrent,(D)liensinfavorofthegovernmentora
governmentagency,(e.g.liensforunpaidtaxesandcustoms
duties,violationofsanctions,drug-traffickinglawsorother
criminalactivities,(E)liensinfavorofapersonwhohas
providedsalvageserviceswithrespecttotheaircraft,and(F)
liensinfavorofcreworemployeesoftheairlineoroperatorof
theaircraft,withrespecttounpaidsumsowedtothem.
Dothelawsofyourjurisdictionprovidefor
anynon-consensualpreferentialnon-
possessoryliensoveraircraftthatcould
ariseinfavorarepairer/mechanicora
landlord/hangar-keeper?
Dothelawsofyourjurisdictionprovidefor
any"fleet-wide"non-consensual
preferentialliensand/orequivalentrightsor
rightsofdetentionoveraircraftthatcould
ariseinfavorofthirdparties,notrequiring
anyformofregistration?
Hasyourcountryadoptedthe1958
ConventionontheRecognitionand
EnforcementofForeignArbitralAwards(the
NewYorkConvention)and,ifso,willthe
courtsofyourjurisdictionrecognizeand
enforceadecisionofanarbitrator?
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Forthepurposesofyouranswer,you
mayassumethatacourtinyourjurisdictionwouldbeentitledto
refuseenforcementofthearbitralawardbasedononeofthe
exceptionsandcarve-outsenumeratedintheNewYork
Convention.
Permittedthresholdconditions(forquestions(a)and(b)onpreviouspagerelatingtoBOX5onJudgments/Arbitration):
(1)thecourtrenderingthejudgmentmusthavehadjurisdictionoverthedefendantandhasobtainedsuchjurisdictioninawaythatis
compatiblewiththelawsofyourjurisdiction;(2)thejudgmentoftherenderingcourtmustbefinalandconclusiveandnotsubjectto
appeal;(3)thejudgmentmusthavebeengivenonthemeritsofthecase(and,forexample,mustnothavebeenobtainedbywayof
“judgmentindefault”);(4)thejudgmentmustnothavebeenobtainedbyfraud;(5)thejudgmentmustnotbeincompatiblewiththepublic
policyofyourjurisdiction;(6)thejudgmentmustnotcontradictanotherjudgmentrenderedbyacourtinyourjurisdiction;and/or(7)in
thecaseofajudgmentrenderedbyanEnglishcourtandifyourcountryisasisterEUmemberstate,anyoftheconditionsorexceptions
permittedbythe“recast”BrusselsRegulation(CouncilRegulation(EU)1215/2012).
A requirementforreciprocity
ofrecognition/enforcementbyaNewYorkorEnglishcourt(asapplicable) isNOTapermittedthreshold
condition ,unlessitcanbesaidwithreasonablecertaintythatonageneralbasis(ratherthanonacasebycasebasis)suchreciprocity
requirementwillbesatisfiedwithrespecttoanysuchNewYorkorEnglishcourtjudgment(because,forexample,areciprocal
enforcementtreatyexists).
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
pillsburylaw.com
Worldwide Aircraft Repossession Index
155
APPENDIX
APPENDIX:30-MINUTE(CHECK-BOX)JURISDICTIONALQUESTIONNAIRE
©PillsburyWinthropShawPittmanLLP
pillsburylaw.com
WorldAircraftRepossessionIndex
103
30-Minute(Check-Box)JurisdictionalQuestionnaire
(continued)
PreferentialLiens(contd…)
Box7(contd…)
GuidanceNotes
Governmentrequisitionandconfiscation
(d)
ENDOFQUESTIONNAIRE-SEEBELOWFORNOTESANDDISCLAIMERS
Notes/Comments(ifany)
Box8
BoxandQuestionnumber:
Note/Comment(belowrepresentsthemaximumpermittedspace):
DISCLAIMERS
ENDOFDOCUMENT
ANSWER"YES"OR"NO".Forthepurposesofyouranswer,you
shoulddisregardgovernmentrequisitionorconfiscationofthe
aircraftincircumstanceswheretherehasbeenaviolationofany
drug-traffickinglawsorothercriminaloffenses.
Dothelawsofyourjurisdictionpermitthe
governmenttorequisitionorconfiscate
anaircraftwithoutneedingtopaythe
ownerreasonablecompensation?
TotheextentthatthisJurisdictionalQuestionnairehasbeenfullyorpartiallycompletedandhasbeenpublishedorhas
otherwisebeenprovidedtoanypersonotherthantheperson(s)whocompletedit(asindicatedonpage1),thefollowing
disclaimersshouldbenoted:
(1)TheJurisdictionalQuestionnairecontainedinthispublicationhasnotbeencompletedbyPillsburyWinthropShawPittman
LLP(“PWSP”)unlessotherwisestated,buthasinsteadbeencompletedbythelawfirmandtheperson(s)indicatedonpage1.
(2)ThispublicationisissuedperiodicallytokeepPWSPclientsandotherinterestedpartiesinformedofcurrentlegal
developmentsthatmayaffectorotherwisebeofinteresttothem.Thecommentscontainedhereindonotconstitutelegalopinion
ofeitherPWSPoranyotherlawfirmidentifiedinthispublicationandshouldnotberegardedasasubstituteforlegaladvice.
(3)ThequestionsandresponsescontainedinthisJurisdictionalQuestionnaireprovideanestimateandpreliminaryindication
onlyastothelikelihoodofsuccess,costandspeedofrepossessing,de-registering,exporting,etc.anaircraftfromthecountry
andjurisdiction(s)indicated,basedoninformationreceivedfromreputablelocalattorneysinsuchcountryand/orjurisdiction
asofthedateindicated.Theactuallikelihoodofsuccessforanyspecificcasemaydiffer,dependingonamoredetailedanalysis
oftheparticularfacts.Insuchcircumstancesspecificandup-to-datelegalandotherprofessionaladviceintherelevant
jurisdiction(s)shouldbesought.Furthermore,thequestionsandresponsescontainedinthisJurisdictionalQuestionnairedonot
representanexhaustiveanalysisofalllegalissuesinthecountryand/orjurisdiction(s)indicatedrelevanttofinancingand
leasingofaircraftinsuchcountryand/orjurisdiction.Theremaybeotherrelevantissuesnotaddressedhereinandfurther
legalandotherprofessionaladviceintherelevantjurisdiction(s)shouldbesought.
ATTORNEYADVERTISING
Resultsdependonanumberoffactorsuniquetoeachmatter.Priorresultsdonotguaranteeasimilaroutcome.
pillsburylaw.com
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
© 2017 Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP. All rights reserved.
pillsburylaw.com
