REAL AND PERSONAL SECURITY creditor more than needed: ownership ra ther than a limited real right. Gradually during many decades following the recognition of security ownership in 1929, the Supreme Court reduced the security owners rights to the rights of a pledgee. It held that the owner is under a duty to sell the security object in execution and satisfy himself from the proceeds of sale. Any surplus money had to be given to the debtor It was thus accepted that security ownership was different from normal owners Another im portant but closely related drawback of security ownership was ack of legal certainty: the concept had developed in practice and was not to be found in legislation. As a result it took many decades to get any certa inty about the rights and duties of the security owner Fiducia cum creditor was repaced with a pledge on movables(art 3: 237 CC)or claims(art. 3: 239 CC). The pledgor remains in actual power of the movables, or, in the case of a claim, the pledge will not be notified to the debtor of the claim. A silent pledge on movables or claims requires a private deed registered with the tax department or, alternatively, a notarial deed. These fomalities prevent antedating but do not aim at making th The register at the tax department is not a public register. The old types of overt pledge on movables and chims(art. 3: 236 CC)are ma inta ined. In certan cases the pledgee may tum the silent ty pe into an overt type In the meantime the Dutch Supreme Court tuned back the a bolition of security ownership to a large extent by acknowledging sale and lease back by way of The causal system for the transfer of things also applies to the creation of limited real rights. As a result the pledge needs a valid legal ground (e.g. a contract requiring the debtor to create a pledge). In principle the pledge, like the mortgage, is a dependent or accessorial right (afhankeli k or accessor recht ). This means that the right of pledge depends on the claim secured by it. Conseq uently the pledge falls away if the chim falls away (e.g. payment or compensation) and the pledge will follow the secured claim when the claim is assigned to a new creditor. However exceptions have been made for example to create a pledge to secure cred its on current accounts, often called bank-pledge or current account pledge. This is ma possible by art. 3: 231 prov iding that a pledge may be created as security fora future claim In principle exercising the pledge involves a forced sale. The pledge may also be exercised by the pledgee in the debtor's insolvency(art. 57 Fw). The pledgee takes a high rank: he may in principle take away(separate)the pledge object from the insolvency proceedings and sell it in execution. For this reason the pledgee, like the mortgagee, is called a separatist a pledge may be created in advance on so-called future objects: movables which do not yet exist or have not yet entered the pledgor's patrimonium, or claims which do not yet exist. The legal act of creation (a real agreement different from any nderlying contract; goederenrechtelike overeenkomst)will be made under a ay 1995, NJ 1996/119. Fiducia cum aio s reoognsed to some extent, yet ownership cannot be split nt legal ownershp and beneficial nterests as n the Engl ih commonREAL AND PERSONAL SECURITY 5 creditor more than needed: ownership rather than a limited real right. Gradually, during many decades following the recognition of security ownership in 1929, the Supreme Court reduced the security owner's rights to the rights of a pledgee. It held that the owner is under a duty to sell the security object in execution and satisfy himself from the proceeds of sale. Any surplus money had to be given to the debtor. It was thus accepted that security ownership was different from normal ownership. Another important but closely related drawback of security ownership was lack of legal certainty: the concept had developed in practice and was not to be found in legislation. As a result it took many decades to get any certainty about the rights and duties of the security owner. Fiducia cum creditore was replaced with a ‘silent’ pledge on movables (art. 3:237 CC) or claims (art. 3:239 CC). The pledgor remains in actual power of the movables, or, in the case of a claim, the pledge will not be notified to the debtor of the claim. A silent pledge on movables or claims requires a private deed registered with the tax department or, alternatively, a notarial deed. These formalities prevent antedating but do not aim at making the security interests public. The register at the tax department is not a public register. The old types of ‘overt’ pledge on movables and claims (art. 3:236 CC) are maintained. In certain cases the pledgee may turn the silent type into an overt type. In the meantime the Dutch Supreme Court turned back the abolition of security ownership to a large extent by acknowledging sale and lease back by way of security.27 The causal system for the transfer of things also applies to the creation of limited real rights. As a result the pledge needs a valid legal ground (e.g. a contract requiring the debtor to create a pledge). In principle the pledge, like the mortgage, is a dependent or accessorial right (afhankelijk or accessoir recht). This means that the right of pledge depends on the claim secured by it. Consequently the pledge falls away if the claim falls away (e.g. payment or compensation) and the pledge will follow the secured claim when the claim is assigned to a new creditor. However, exceptions have been made for example to create a pledge to secure credits on current accounts, often called bank-pledge or current account pledge. This is made possible by art. 3:231 providing that a pledge may be created as security for a future claim. In principle exercising the pledge involves a forced sale. The pledge may also be exercised by the pledgee in the debtor's insolvency (art. 57 Fw). The pledgee takes a high rank: he may in principle take away (separate) the pledge object from the insolvency proceedings and sell it in execution. For this reason the pledgee, like the mortgagee, is called a separatist. A pledge may be created in advance on so-called future objects: movables which do not yet exist or have not yet entered the pledgor's patrimonium, or claims which do not yet exist. The legal act of creation (a rea l agreement different from any underlying contract; goederenrechtelijke overeenkomst) will be made under a 27. HR 19 May 1995, NJ 1996/119. Fiducia cum amico is recognised to some extent, yet ownership cannot be split into legal ownership and beneficial interests as in the English common law