Small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) business owners influence the growth and development of sub-Saharan Africa and the welfare of its citizens. However, SME owners often lack the strategies to access and obtain invoice factoring financing to fund their businesses. Guided by the pecking order theory and the credit rationing theory, the purpose of this multiple case study was to explore strategies that 3 SME owners in Kenya used to access and obtain invoice factoring financing to fund their businesses. Data were collected from in-depth semistructured Skype interviews and organizational documents. Data were analyzed using the Krippendorff content analysis methodology. Member checking was used to validate the interview responses and enhance the credibility of results. Three strategy themes emerged from data analysis: proper documentation, effective third-party relationships, and connections with government officials. The study may contribute to positive social change for SME owners in sub-Saharan Africa by providing actionable strategies they can use to access and obtain invoice factoring financing to fund and sustain their businesses. Citizens of Kenya may experience more job opportunities, improved quality of life, increased household incomes, and sustained economic growth.

本論文共分八章.第一章緒論,包括研究動機、研究方法與限制，以及本論文之結構。第二章應收帳款管理業務概論,所談為應收帳款管理業務之定義、沿革、種類、及功能。由於風土民情及業務運作上的差異，各國的學者對應收帳款管理業務的性質看法尚未趨於一致，第三章即就英.美學者與實務見解加以整理,並指出應收帳款業務當事人間的權義關係。首先介紹銷貨人對管理人所負之移轉債權、通知購貨人之義務和其他附隨之義務。談到移轉債權，型態上，由實務運作，可分為多次讓與及一次讓與兩種，而一次讓與尚涉及將來發生之債權是否具讓與性，學者於此爭論紛紛；此外債權由銷貨人手上移轉到管理人處，其法律上性質如何，亦有不同說法，本文於此作一整理。依本國民法，通知購貨人債權已移轉的義務，雖並不一定是由銷貨人負擔，但本文參考外國立法例，認為由銷貨人單方負擔最能減少購貨人受詐欺而蒙二次清償風險的狀況，所以視通知為銷貨人之義務，於此也討論通知的性質及時間。最後談及管理人對銷貨人所負之給付對價、承擔風險的義務及其他附隨義務，例如提供管理帳款、會計之服務、以其在特定業界之長年經驗，對銷貨商提供業務諮詢。第四章之主題為銷貨人與購貨人間的權利義務銷貨人與購貨人間最主要的當然是原商業交易之關係，但本章重點在討論：如銷貨人與購貨人間契約中有一禁止讓與特約，則會對應收帳款管理業務產生什麼影響？本文將由禁止讓與特約之效力、檢討及迴避三點切入此問題。第五章討論管理人與契約外第三人間的法律關係所謂管理人與契約外第三人間的法律關係，包括管理人與購貨人間的權利義務、以及管理人與購貨人以外第三人間的法律關係。管理人與購貨人間的權利義務，始於銷貨人將債權讓與管理人時，內容包括購貨人對管理人的清償、以及抗辯的援用與割斷，對此本文將以比較法的方式作一介紹。管理人與購貨人以外第三人，最常發生關係的時候就是銷貨人就同一債權多次讓與。例如，面臨財務窘境的銷貨人將已賣與管理人而尚未交付之債權，再設定質權以獲資金之暫時舒緩，如果調度得當，銷貨人於管理人向購貨人要求清償之前就已清償質借債款，則尚不致引起太大爭執，然一旦周轉不靈，就會發生在同一債權多次讓與時誰才能取得優先受讓權的問題。關於優先權誰屬的問題，各國態度不一，本文仍以比較法的方式，對德、日，英美及我國法作一論述，最末並提出淺見做結。延續上一章管理人與購貨人以外第三人間所發生的同一債權多次讓與的問題。實務上,銷貨人與供應其銷貨來源之上游，我們稱之供貨人( supplier )，二者間常有「所有權保留」 ( reservaton of title ) 之約定，其意義為在銷貨人將貨款付清與供貨人之前，供貨人仍保有貨品之所有權，稱之「單純的所有權保留約款」。如果當事人間所約定者，除了「單純的所有權保留約款」，還包括有延長的所有權保留約款中的「預行轉讓約款」（Vorausabtretungsklausel），則若銷貨人不清償貨款，在銷貨人將貨品移轉與購貨人前，供貨人可以取回其貨品，而在銷貨人將貨品移轉與購貨人後，供貨人便可基於購貨人之新債權人的身分，對銷貨人之銷售所得主張受讓，於後者情形，就可能與管理人的權利產生衝突。基於「所有權保留約款」所生之權利競合問題，即第六章所欲探討的主題。本章首先討論保留所有權約定的法律效果，包括對購貨人和對管理人的效力；接著，要探討應收帳款管理契約遇上保留所有權約定的效力，由於應收帳款管理業務在我國尚屬方興未艾，還沒發生這種問題，故本文還是以比較法的態度，藉德、英學界、實務界之作法來介紹此課題。自七十年代起，在國際私法統一研究所( The International Institute for the Unification of Private Law )的主導及多國的協商之下，產生了國際應收帳款管理公約( Unidroit Convention on International Factoring )。第七章旨在討論公約之適用範圍、以及其關於法律關係之規定的介紹，同時也要站在一批判的角度，指出公約之缺失與貢獻。第八章是結論 目　　　　錄 第一章 緒論*****...*******************...1 第一節 研究動機***...******************...1 第二節 研究方法與限制****...**************...4 第三節 本文架構********...*************...4 第一章 應收帳款管理業務概論**********...******...8 第一節 定義與沿革****************...****...8 第一項 定義******************...****...8 第二項 沿革******************...****...9 第一節 種類與功能******************...**.10 第一項 種類**********************...10 第一款 以有無償還請求權為區別************...10 第一目 無償還請求權之預付**************10 第二目 有償還請求權之應收帳款管理業務********13 第二款 以有無預付為區別***************...15 第一目 預付應收帳款管理業務*************15 第二目 到期應收帳款管理業務*************16 第三款 以有無讓與通知為區別*************...17 第一目 通知型應收帳款管理業務*****.******...17 第二目 不通知型應收帳款管理業務***********17 第四款 國內業務與國際業務之區別***********...20 第五款 有銀行參與之應收帳款管理業務*********...22 第二項 功能*************..*********.23 第一款 信用擔保功能******************.23 第二款 業務代行之功能*****************.24 第三款 提供融資之功能****************.*25 第一節 應收帳款管理業務與應收票據買賣業務之比較******26 第一項 概說******************...****.26 第二項 應收帳款管理業務與應收票據買賣業務之比較...****.27 第一章 應收帳款管理業務當事人間之法律關係**...*******.30 第一節 應收帳款管理契約之基本內容*************30 第二節 銷貨人方面*********************33 第一項 移轉債權之義務******************33 第一款 債權讓與之基礎原因關係*************33 第一目 前言*********************33 第二目 德國*********************35 第三目 英國*********************37 第四目 美國*********************39 第五目 管見*********************40 第二款 債權讓與之方式****************...42 第一目 個別讓與*******************43 第二目 概括讓與*******************45 第二項 通知購貨人之義務****************...54 第一款 概說*********************...54 第二款 通知的性質*******************.56 第三款 通知的時間******************...60 第三項 其他義務********************...61 第三節 管理人方面********************...66 第一項 給付對價的義務*****************...66 第二項 風險的承擔*******************...67 第一款 對購貨人之授信風險***************.67 第二款 對銷貨人之授信風險**************...67 第三項 其他義務********************...68 第四章 銷貨人與購貨人間的法律關係*************..69 第一節 原商業交易之關係*****************...69 第二節 禁止讓與特約*******************...69 第一項 禁止讓與特約之效力***************...69 第二項 禁止讓與特約之檢討***************...72 第三項 禁止讓與特約之迴避***************...75 第一款 行紀關係的利用****************...75 第二款 債務保證制度的利用***************78 第五章 管理人與契約外第三人間的法律關係**********..81 第一節 緒言***********************..81 第二節 管理人與購貨人間的法律關係************..81 第一項 購貨人對管理人的清償**************..82 第二項 抗辯的援用與割斷****************..86 第一節 管理人與購貨人以外第三人間的法律關係********91 第一項 德國**********************...92 第二項 日本**********************...93 第三項 英美**********************...96 第四項 我國**********************...98 第五項 結論**********************.101 第六章 應收帳款管理業務與所有權保留約款之競合*******102 第一節 緒論***********************.102 第二節 所有權保留約款對購貨人的影響***********.103 第三節 應收帳款管理業務與所有權保留約款之競合******.103 第一項 前言**********************.105 第二項 德國**********************.106 第一款 問題背景*******************.106 第二款 學說爭議*******************.108 第一目 供貨人優先保護說**************..108 第一目 管理人權利優先說**************..111 第三目 折衷說*******************..112 第三項 英國**********************.114 第一款 概說*********************.114 第二款 所有權保留約款之成立要件**********.....114 第三款 銷貨人與供貨人間法律關係之性質*******.....116 第四款 管理人權利之優越性**************.117 第四節 小結**********************.....118 第七章 國際應收帳款管理公約之適用*************120 第一節 緒言***********************.120 第一節 公約之適用範圍******************.120 第一項 前言**********************.122 第二項 定義**********************.123 第一款 應收帳款管理契約之定義************.123 第二款 國際應收帳款管理契約之定義**********.127 第三項 公約之適用範圍*****************.128 第一款 直接適用*******************.128 第一款 間接適用*******************.132 第一目 準據法之選定****************..132 第二目 法院逛尋******************..136 第三節 關係人間之權利與義務***************.137 第一項 前言**********************.137 第二項 管理人與銷貨人之權義**************.138 第一款 前言*********************.138 第二款 債權移轉之形式****************.139 第三款 其他權利之移轉*************..**...140 第三項 購貨人之權義******************.141 第一款 禁止債權讓與特約之效力************.141 第二款 清償與抗辯******************.143 第一目 購貨人之清償****************..143 第一目 購貨人之抗辯****************..145 第四節 公約之評議********************.148 第一項 關於適用範圍之規定***************.148 第二項 關於法律關係之規定***************.149 第一款 管理人與銷貨人之其他債權人的請求權競合方面**.149 第二款 應收帳款管理契約方面****. ********...150 第三款 禁止債權讓與特約方面****. ****..****.150 第三項 小結**********************.152 第八章 結論************************153 第一節 利用應收帳款管理業務之效益************.153 第二節 應配合之措施*******************.155 第三節 結語***********************.157 附件一****************************158 附件二****************************167 參考書目***************************177 / This dissertation is about factoring. Two main roles of the factoring agreement are the factor and the client who sells goods to his custom. Because the client is not good at managing his receviables, the client assigns(or sells) the receviables to the factor to conduct, then he may concentrate his energy in making his bussiness better. For the receviables assigned from the client to the factor are between the client and the custom at first, after they are assigned , the relative rights of the receviables are also assigned to the factor, and the custome becomesthe debtor of the factor. That means because of factoring, there will be a complex triangel relationship among the factor, the client and the customer. Besides, The relationship is often not so narrow, 'cause the client may borrow money from others such as banks, we call them the third party, on the security of the receviables assigned to the factor, if the client can't get the receviables back from banks by giving back money to the banks, the factor will face the problems that he may lose those rights of the receviables. The author tries to make relationships among the factor,the client, the customer and the third party clear in this dissertation. Because factroing is getting more and more important now, Unidroit Convention on International Factoring is also introdeced.

本研究探討以記帳型態為貨物買賣付款方式下之應收帳款收買業 以應收 帳款收買業務本身所綜合具備的交易上之機能如出 保險、貨款收取等等 為出發， 與其它具有類似性質的工A 並以應收帳款收買交易的中心問題 ，即債權的轉讓問題暋D作一探討， 在最後並以 1990 年國際應收帳款收 買公i一步討論此一公約對於國際應收帳款收買業務的影響。

Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-15T19:32:57Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Daniel Gloria.pdf: 1779297 bytes, checksum: 9bd41fd468fe82dde5e3635f4ae28219 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-08-19 / The aim of this study is to identify the factors in determining credit for companies in judicial or extrajudicial rehabilitation or which are undergoing a period of financial crisis. This research is particularly relevant in the current scenario where the number of companies opting for the rehabilitation process is constantly increasing. Several causes can be attributed to companies showing poor performances and facing subsequent financial crises either as a result of internal factors or external ones. The lack of competent managerial decision-making, adoption of consistent strategies, poor management of the company's cash, among many other factors, cause loss of income and lowering of credit rating, thus leading to credit restrictions by commercial banks. Faced with this financial crisis, some companies end up taking advantage of the benefits provided by Statue 11.101/05 and opting for bankruptcy protection. Given the scarcity of credit, companies turn to factoring and FIDC, through which assignment of receivables helps to meet the need for raising funds and maintaining company operations. In this context, the present research proposes a study of the determining factors in granting credit to businesses in rehabilitation (turnaround), given the assumption of disparity between financial statements and the need for credit to keep the company going during the period of recovery from the crisis. The theoretical framework bases the survey on the causes of the financial crisis, followed by factoring, FIDC, securitization, Statute 11.101/05, the American Bankruptcy Code, credit and the role of trust. Qualitative, exploratory research was conducted at companies in the city and state of São Paulo. The results indicate two main trends in the credit-granting process; (i) the adoption of an agent who builds confidence and lowers the perceived risk for the funding entity; and (ii) the search for a partner to finance the company during the formal or informal rehabilitation process. / O objetivo deste estudo é identificar os determinantes de crédito para empresas em recuperação judicial, extrajudicial ou em crise financeira. Esta pesquisa está amplamente inserida no cenário atual em que os índices de empresas que optam pelo processo de recuperação se apresentam em constante elevação. Diversas causas podem levar as empresas ao desempenho desfavorável e, consequente, crise financeira, seja por fatores internos ou externos. A ausência de tomada de decisão gerencial, da adoção de estratégias consistentes, a má gestão do caixa da empresa, dentre tantas outras, ocasionam a perda de resultado e a deterioração do rating de crédito e, consequentemente, à restrição ao crédito por bancos comerciais. Diante da crise financeira, algumas empresas acabam recorrendo ao benefício da lei 11.101/05, optando pelo processo de recuperação judicial. Face à escassez do crédito, as empresas recorrem à factoring e Fundos de Investimentos em Direitos Creditórios (FIDC) para que, por meio da cessão de direitos creditórios possam suprir a necessidade de captação de recursos e manter o funcionamento da operação. Nesse contexto, a presente pesquisa propõe um estudo sobre os fatores determinantes na concessão do crédito para as empresas em recuperação (turnaround), dado o pressuposto da assimetria nas demonstrações financeiras e a necessidade de crédito para fomentar a empresa durante o período de recuperação da crise. O referencial teórico traz o levantamento a partir das causas da crise financeira, seguido do factoring, Fundos de Investimentos em Direitos Creditórios (FIDC), securitizadora, da lei 11.101/05, da lei americana Bankruptcy Code, do crédito, da confiança, do estudo de um caso real, chegando às conclusões. Realizou-se pesquisa qualitativa, do tipo exploratória, com 9 empresas da cidade de São Paulo e interior em que a soma do patrimônio líquido representa 33% do mercado. A aplicação do caso real de uma empresa em recuperação judicial com a adoção de um FIDC para fomentar o caixa a partir da contratação da empresa de consultoria permite compreender todo o processo. Os resultados obtidos através da análise de conteúdo indicam 2 vertentes no processo de concessão de crédito, sendo (i) a adoção de um agente que eleve a confiança e diminua a percepção do risco para o fomentador e (ii) a busca por parceiro para financiar a empresa durante o processo de recuperação judicial ou recuperação informal (acordo fora do tribunal). Constatou-se os seguintes determinantes de crédito: a competência da empresa em produzir resultados, o caráter da empresa, a qualidade das informações financeiras e a adoção de consultor, ainda que exerça o papel de agente, e mitigador de risco percebido.

The aim of this study is to examine factoring as an option of finance for small businesses to make capital available to the cash account. Small businesses constitutes 99.4 percent of all enterprises in Sweden, and are thereby important actors of the community. Liquidity is the viability of a company; cash flow problems limits growth and is a common reason for bankruptcy. Factoring is a finance option which make capital locked in account receivables available. Through a qualitative study using interviews, the use of factoring has been examined amongst five small businesses in the construction industry. The results showed that factoring is a suitable option of finance for small businesses to attain greater value since it creates the right prerequisites. Companies use factoring when they have liquidity problems and an imbalance in cash flows. Positive aspects of factoring is especially its ability to quickly improve the cash flow. The negative highlighted is the cost, but they are considered reasonable. / Syftet med forskningen är att undersöka factoring som finansieringsalternativ för småföretag för att frigöra kapital till kassan. Småföretag utgör 99,4 procent av allt företagande i Sverige och är därmed viktiga aktörer för samhället. Likviditet är företags livskraft, problem med kassaflödet begränsar tillväxt och är en vanlig anledning till att företag går i konkurs. Factoring är ett finansieringsalternativ som frigör kapital som är låst i kundfordringar. Genom en kvalitativ studie, med hjälp av intervjuer, har nyttjandet av factoring undersökts bland fem stycken småföretag i byggbranschen. Resultatet av studien visade att factoring är ett lämpligt finansieringsalternativ för småföretag att uppnå ett högre värde eftersom det skapar rätt förutsättningar. Företag använder factoring vid likviditetsproblem och obalans i kassan. Det positiva med factoring är framförallt dess förmåga att snabbt förbättra kassaflödet. Nackdelarna som lyfts fram är kostnaderna, men dessa anses rimliga.

應收帳款管理業務（factoring）係應收帳款管理業者自銷售貨物之賣方受讓承兌交單（D/A）、記帳（O/A）付款條件下之應收帳款債權，而承擔債權無法回收之信用風險，並可預先對賣方提供融資墊款，另包括帳務管理、帳款催收、信用調查及商情諮詢等業務。是以應收帳款債權讓與觀念為核心，兼具徵信、融資、管理、徵信、避險等功能，而建構之新興貿易金融工具。 由承擔風險之角度觀察，應收帳款管理契約最重要之分類在於有無追索權（recourse）。由融資之功能之有無觀察，則有預先付款或到期付款之應收帳款管理契約型態。此二種要契約類型影響應收帳款管理契約之契約性質。各國有買賣契約、消費借貸說、類型區別說、委任契約說、混合契約說，解釋上究以何者為宜，為本論文第一個議題。 無論契約功能如何多變，應收帳款管理法律關係均以應收帳款債權之讓與為不變之基本核心。且應收帳款管理係雙方約定於一定期間內持續發生之所有應收帳款債權均應移轉於應收帳款管理業者，故以將來債權（Künftige Forderungen）之概括讓與（Globalzession）為其特色。基此，本論文第二個議題係關於應收帳款管理契約下，應收帳款讓與行為所呈現之法律問題：包括將來債權之概括讓與、與延長所有權保留之衝突、對抗債務人及第三人之要件……等。 在我國法院判決實務上，應收帳款管理契約產生爭議在於：定型化契約條款是否顯失公平、是否允許將來債權之概括讓與、將來債權之預先概括讓與通知是否可對抗債務人、將來債權之概括讓與與禁止讓與約款及查封效力之衝突、「商業糾紛」、「視同未經轉讓」、「恢復轉讓效力」條款應如何解釋……等。 綜合外國見解與我國法院爭議問題，再參酌日本債權讓渡登記制度、法國債權證書交付制度、德國貸款擔保法草案、我國金融資產證券化條例之公告制度，可知我國民法關於債權讓與之規定，似有不足之處。本論文乃提出修法建議，希望有助於債權讓與之交易安全保障。

O problema de fatorar e decompor funções Booleanas é Σ-completo2 para funções gerais. Algoritmos eficientes e exatos podem ser criados para classes de funções existentes como funções read-once, disjoint-support decomposable e read-polarity-once. Uma forma fatorada é chamada de read-once (RO) se cada variável aparece uma única vez. Uma função Booleana é RO se existe uma forma fatorada RO que a representa. Por exemplo, a função representada por =12+134+135 é uma função RO, pois pode ser fatorada em =1(2+3(4+5)). Uma função Booleana f(X) pode ser decomposta usando funções mais simples g e h de forma que ()=ℎ((1),2) sendo X1, X2 ≠ ∅, e X1 ∪ X2 = X. Uma decomposição disjunta de suporte (disjoint-support decomposition – DSD) é um caso especial de decomposição funcional, onde o conjunto de entradas X1 e X2 não compartilham elementos, i.e., X1 ∩ X2 = ∅. Por exemplo, a função =12̅̅̅3+123̅̅̅ 4̅̅̅+12̅̅̅4 é DSD, pois existe uma decomposição tal que =1(2⊕(3+4)). Uma forma read-polarity-once (RPO) é uma forma fatorada onde cada polaridade (positiva ou negativa) de uma variável aparece no máximo uma vez. Uma função Booleana é RPO se existe uma forma fatorada RPO que a representa. Por exemplo, a função =1̅̅̅24+13+23 é RPO, pois pode ser fatorada em =(1̅̅̅4+3)(1+2). Esta tese apresenta quarto novos algoritmos para síntese de funções Booleanas. A primeira contribuição é um método de síntese para funções read-once baseado em uma estratégia de divisão-e-conquista. A segunda contribuição é um algoritmo top-down para síntese de funções DSD baseado em soma-de-produtos, produto-de-somas e soma-exclusiva-de-produtos. A terceira contribuição é um método bottom-up para síntese de funções DSD baseado em diferença Booleana e cofatores. A última contribuição é um novo método para síntese de funções RPO que é baseado na análise de transições positivas e negativas. / The problem of factoring and decomposing Boolean functions is Σ-complete2 for general functions. Efficient and exact algorithms can be created for an existing class of functions known as read-once, disjoint-support decomposable and read-polarity-once functions. A factored form is called read-once (RO) if each variable appears only once. A Boolean function is RO if it can be represented by an RO form. For example, the function represented by =12+134+135 is a RO function, since it can be factored into =1(2+3(4+5)). A Boolean function f(X) can be decomposed using simpler subfunctions g and h, such that ()=ℎ((1),2) being X1, X2 ≠ ∅, and X1 ∪ X2 = X. A disjoint-support decomposition (DSD) is a special case of functional decomposition, where the input sets X1 and X2 do not share any element, i.e., X1 ∩ X2 = ∅. Roughly speaking, DSD functions can be represented by a read-once expression where the exclusive-or operator (⊕) can also be used as base operation. For example, =1(2⊕(4+5)). A read-polarity-once (RPO) form is a factored form where each polarity (positive or negative) of a variable appears at most once. A Boolean function is RPO if it can be represented by an RPO factored form. For example the function =1̅̅̅24+13+23 is RPO, since it can factored into =(1̅̅̅4+3)(1+2). This dissertation presents four new algorithms for synthesis of Boolean functions. The first contribution is a synthesis method for read-once functions based on a divide-and-conquer strategy. The second and third contributions are two algorithms for synthesis of DSD functions: a top-down approach that checks if there is an OR, AND or XOR decomposition based on sum-of-products, product-of-sums and exclusive-sum-of-products inputs, respectively; and a method that runs in a bottom-up fashion and is based on Boolean difference and cofactor analysis. The last contribution is a new method to synthesize RPO functions which is based on the analysis of positive and negative transition sets. Results show the efficacy and efficiency of the four proposed methods.

Orientador: Carlos Eduardo Negrão Bizzotto. / Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Regional de Blumenau, Centro de Ciências Humanas e da Comunicação, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Desenvolvimento Regional.

The law of preferential rights has, since the 70’s, given företagshypotek a high priority after a company has claimed bankruptcy. After the costs concerning the insolvent estate and the liens, företagshypotek has received full refund. The effect has been that the unprioritized creditors often have not recieved any of their claims after the bank have re-cieved theirs. Many countries have during the last decades deviated from this law and in 2003, Sweden decided to take the same path. The new law was implemented in January 2005. The law of företagshypotek was replaced by the law of företagsintekning which purpose was to give the unprioritzed creditors a greater chance to receive refunds on their claims. Företagsinteckning is only giving the prioritiested creditors 55 % instead of the former 100 % of the nominal value. The debate concerning this new law has been about the fear that it is now harder for companies to get loans, since the banks have become more restricted in their credit granting with företagsinteckning as collataral security. In addition, the banks have also expanded their factoring and leasing services in order to own the companies balance sheet, thus own all things that can be transformed into money. This leads us up to the question: Will the new law make it better for the unprioritized creditors when bankrupsy of their debtors occurs? Our purpose is to describe and explain the consequences that will occur after the change of the preferential rights for the unprioritized creditors. This essay is delimited to focus on the unprioritized creditors and the law change concerning the change from företaghypotek to business mortgage. We have concluded that the implemented law change is not an improvement for the unprioritized creditor’s situation when bankrupsy of their debtors occurs, contrary to the purpose of the new law. The banks new ways concerning credit granting and new services could easily spoil the intended effect, and might even leave them worse off. / Förmånsrättslagen har länge givit företagshypotek en hög prioritet vid konkurser. Näst efter konkursboets egna kostnader och panträtterna har de haft full återbetalningsrätt. Detta har inneburit att de lägre prioriterade fordringsägarna i många fall har fått se sina fordringar förverkas efter att innehavaren av företagshypoteksbrevet, oftast en bank, ta-git sin del av kakan. Många länder har under de senaste åren frångått detta system och 2003 beslutades att Sverige skulle göra likadant. Den nya lagens övergångsregler trädde i kraft 1:a januari 2004 och lagen i sin helhet 1:a januari 2005. Lagen om företagshypotek ersattes av lagen om företagsinteckning och har som syfte att ge en större skara ford-ringsägare chans till utdelning vid bolagskonkurser. Detta genom att inteckningen endast ger rätt till 55 % av företagsinteckningens nominella belopp som prioriterad utdelning, mot tidigare 100 % av företagshypoteket. Den kritik som riktats mot den nya lagen har varit att det blir svårare för företag att få tillgång till främmande kapital på grund av att bankerna har blivit mer restriktiva i sin långivning med företagsinteckningen som säkerhet. Dessutom har bankerna utvidgat leasing och factoringtjänsterna för att på så sätt kunna äga ett företags balansräkning som kompensation för sina försämrade villkor. Detta leder oss till frågeställningen: Kommer den nya förmånsrättslagstiftningen förbättra situationen för de fordringsägare som står sist i prioriteringsordningen, vid konkurs av dess gäldenär? Vårt syfte är att beskriva och förklara de konsekvenser som ändringen den 1:a januari 2004 av förmånsrättslagstiftningen kommer att föra med sig för de oprioriterade fordringsägarna. Arbetet är skrivet med fokus på de oprioriterade fordringsägarna. När det gäller lagändringen fokuserar vi på den del som handlar om ändringen från företagshypotek till företagsinteckning. Vår slutsats är att den genomförda lagändringen inte är en förbättring för de oprioriterade fordringsägarnas situation vid konkurs av dess gäldenär, alltså raka motsatsen till syftet med den nya lagens införande. Bankens ändrade kreditmönster skulle utan någon större insats kunnat omintetgöra den förbättring som lagändringen var tänkt att medföra.

<p>Since the pactum de non cedendo is prohibitory by its nature and operation, our law should have proceeded with caution when determining its effect. This, unfortunately, is not what transpired in the locus classicus decision. Nor did subsequent cases correct this fatal ratio. The distressing truth is that the old authorities, upon whom the locus classicus judgment is based, were in all probability not writing about pacta de non cedendo. Strangely enough, when this was suggested by an academic in the field, it elicited no response. The lack of response evidences a lack of interest in the topic in general, partly due to the uncertain state of affairs in which the pactum de non cedendo operates, and partly due to the courts&rsquo / unwillingness to rectify the situation. Despite the waning interest, the pactum de non cedendo is prevalent and appears in many types of contracts, most recently in the powerhouse factoring industry, and cannot simply be swept under the rug. This dissertation breathes new life into the pactum de non cedendo and discusses its validity and effect from a fresh perspective: A commercial perspective with a strong influence from American law. Hopefully this re-evaluation of the pactum de non cedendo will re-capture the attention of academics and judges alike, so that those in the position to do so, will re-consider its validity and effect.</p>