• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.391-410
• /
• 2017

This study examines Romalpa clause as an extended or enlarged retention of title clause under SGA. Under a simple retention of title clause, the seller retains title to goods supplied until the goods have been paid. A simple retention of title gives the seller super-priority interest in other creditors of the buyer without registering a charge. Aluminium Industrie Vaassen BV v. Romalpa Aluminium Ltd introduced the concept of 'extended reservation of title(so called 'Romalpa clause') in English law. It is because the Court of Appeal held that under an extended reservation about title clause the seller can trace his title into money which constitutes the proceed of sale by the buyer of goods supplied by the seller. However, since Romalpa case, the courts are reluctant to uphold the seller's extended title. Under Romalpa clause, the seller attempts to extend his protection by laying claims to new products manufactured from his goods or to proceeds of sale by the buyer. Where the seller's goods are lawfully used by the buyer to create new goods, the property in the new goods will generally vest in the buyer. It is because there has been discomfort if the seller gains the windfall profit of the new goods. Moreover, regarding tracing proceeds of sale by the buyer, the courts held that the seller must establish fiduciary relationship with the buyer. If the fiduciary requirement cannot be established, the extended retention of title clause is seen as a charge over the proceeds, and void if not registered. For these reasons, it is difficult that the claims based on the extended retention of title clause would be upheld.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.75
• /
• pp.29-48
• /
• 2017

This study describes the retention of title under UCC. UCC ${\S}$ 2-401 prescribes that any retention or reservation by the seller of the title (property) in goods shipped or delivered to the buyer is limited in effect to a reservation of a security interest. It means that the retention of title generates a security interest in the same way like a charge. To be effective, a security interest must be attached or perfected. Once attachment occurs, a security interest is enforceable against the buyer. Once a security interest is perfected, a security interest is enforceable against third parties. Under UCC, a simple retention of title clause is valid as long as it is incorporated into the contract of sale. If the seller acquires a perfected security interest, he as a secured party can enjoy a priority against other creditors. But if a security interest is not perfected but PMSI is afforded, the seller has a special priority. Secondly, under UCC ${\S}$ 9-335 and 9-336, if a security interest under an enlarged retention of title clause is perfected, the seller as the secured party has a valid security interest in the product or mass into which his goods have been mixed or commingled. But in terms of assession of goods, as the seller has a security interest only in his goods, if the seller wants to enlarge his security interest in the whole, a security agreement should cover its intention. Thirdly, under UCC ${\S}$ 9-315, a security interest in proceeds of subsale of goods supplied by the seller is a perfected security interest if the security interest in the original collateral was perfected. But if the proceeds are cash proceeds, it should be identifiable from other funds of the buyer.