Citaat | Gerechtshof Amsterdam 14 november 2017

Onder 3.3 Gerechtshof Amsterdam 14 november 2017

Een alinea uit Gerechtshof Amsterdam 14 november 2017, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2017:4683.

We have suggested that it might be beneficial to Bank Indonesia if a distinction is made between two types of agreements: (1) an actual pledge agreement whereby specific deposits are fully pledged to Indover to cover the risk in a number of specific loans and (2) an agreement whereby the deposits are not yet pledged, but where Bank Indonesia undertakes to leave the deposits with Indover and to pledge them to Indover at the earliest request of the management of Indoverbank. This second ‘promise to pledge’ has to be structured in such a way that it materially achieves the same level of certainty as the actual pledge agreement. However, in legal terms there is a difference between deposits that actually have been pledged and deposits that will have to be pledged at the request of Indover.

Zelf controleren

Voor dit citaat hoeft niemand Bron op zijn woord te geloven. Het document dat rechtspraak.nl publiceerde, staat op https://bron.page/api/v1/blobs/4b453090e678ca15737b8dca7859dd7089b6d4e12f04d77bef83ea3d348bb0a3. Wie het ophaalt en de SHA-256 ervan berekent, krijgt 4b453090e678ca15737b8dca7859dd7089b6d4e12f04d77bef83ea3d348bb0a3, en de alinea staat in dat document op bytes 46088 tot 46901.