VAN ERP/VAN VLIET suspensive condition. If all other requirements have been met the pledge will automatically be created the moment the object comes into being or enters the pledgor's patrimonium. The creation in advance of a pledge on clams is restricted to claims arising from an existing legal relationship, for example periodical lease payments. According to the principle of specificity which applies to any transfer, creation or abandonment of a real right (i.e. ownership or a lim ited real right )a pledge should always relate to a specified object(the security object ) The Supreme Court held that in the case of pledges on large amounts of chims the principle of specificity is applied leniently in that the pledge does not require a full list of all claims(the ecurity objects) to be registered. a shortened list suffices as long as it enables a detemm ination of the exact security objects, e.g. references to detailed computer lists which are not themselves registered 28 In recent case law the Supreme Court extended the pledge on a claim in a surprising way. Due to the principle of specificity the pledge will end when the ecurity object, the claim, falls away as a result of payment of the claim. According to art. 3: 246(5)CC the pledgee who demands payment of the cha im himself (this is possible in the case of an overt pledge) will not lose his right of pledge: because of real subrogation it will subsist on the money as the new security object. However, as Dutch law recognises real subrogation only in specific cases explicitly mentioned in the code, the pledge cannot subsist where the payment is received by the pledgor his receiver in insolvency(this happens in the ca se of a silent pledge). Nonetheless the Supreme Court moderated this inevita ble consequence by giv ing this silen pledgee a high rank in insolvency despite the loss ofhis pledge. 29 2.3 Mortga The general principles on pledges and mortgages imply that as to the creation of mortgages the causal system of establishment applies and that- as a matter of principle-no right of mortgage can exist if there is no underly ing loan. Furthermore Dutch law does not allow an owner=s mortgage, as is e.g. possible under German and Swiss law. the very moment the mortgagee becomes owner of the burdened object the mortgage falls a way as a result of confusion of the right of ownership and the right of mortgage. 30 Unlike e.g German and Swiss law, Dutch law also does not allow the creation of a document in which the mortga ge is laid down and which may be transferred as a document of title. The owner of property which was burdened with a right of mortgage can ask the creditor of the loan for a notarial declration that the right of mortgage no longer exists. This declaration can be registered in the public land register as ev idence of the extinction of the right of mortgage When the debtor is in default the mortgagee can take several measures. If expressly agreed in the deed of mortgage and with the authorisation of the President of the District Court, the mort ga gee may take over the mana gement of the property HR 14 October 1994.NJ 1995/447 29, HR 17 February 1995, NJ 1996/471; HR23 April 1999, NJ2000/30 See art. 3: 81(2Xe)CC Art.3:274C.C.VAN ERP/VAN VLIET 6 suspensive condition. If all other requirements have been met the pledge will automatically be created the moment the object comes into being or enters the pledgor's patrimonium. The creation in advance of a pledge on claims is restricted to claims arising from an existing legal relationship, for example periodical lease payments. According to the principle of specificity which applies to any transfer, creation or abandonment of a real right (i.e. ownership or a limited real right) a pledge should always relate to a specified object (the security object). The Supreme Court held that in the case of pledges on large amounts of claims the principle of specificity is applied leniently in that the pledge does not require a full list of all claims (the security objects) to be registered. A shortened list suffices as long as it enables a determination of the exact security objects, e.g. references to detailed computer lists which are not themselves registered.28 In recent case law the Supreme Court extended the pledge on a claim in a surprising way. Due to the principle of specificity the pledge will end when the security object, the claim, falls away as a result of payment of the claim. According to art. 3:246(5) CC the pledgee who demands payment of the claim himself (this is possible in the case of an overt pledge) will not lose his right of pledge: because of real subrogation it will subsist on the money as the new security object. However, as Dutch law recognises real subrogation only in specific cases explicitly mentioned in the code, the pledge cannot subsist where the payment is received by the pledgor or his receiver in insolvency (this happens in the ca se of a silent pledge). Nonetheless the Supreme Court moderated this inevitable consequence by giving this silent pledgee a high rank in insolvency despite the loss of his pledge.29 2.3 Mortgage The general principles on pledges and mortgages imply that as to the creation of mortgages the causal system of establishment applies and that - as a matter of principle - no right of mortgage can exist if there is no underlying loan. Furthermore, Dutch law does not allow an owner=s mortgage, as is e.g. possible under German and Swiss law: the very moment the mortgagee becomes owner of the burdened object the mortgage falls away as a result of confusion of the right of ownership and the right of mortgage.30 Unlike e.g. German and Swiss law, Dutch law also does not allow the creation of a document in which the mortgage is laid down and which may be transferred as a document of title. The owner of property which was burdened with a right of mortgage can ask the creditor of the loan for a notarial declaration that the right of mortgage no longer exists.31 This declaration can be registered in the public land register as evidence of the extinction of the right of mortgage. When the debtor is in default the mortgagee can take several measures. If expressly agreed in the deed of mortgage and with the authorisation of the President of the District Court, the mortgagee may take over the management of the property. 28. HR 14 October 1994, NJ 1995/447. 29. HR 17 February 1995, NJ 1996/471; HR 23 April 1999, NJ 2000/30. 30. See art. 3:81(2)(e) C.C. 31. Art. 3:274 C.C