What types of collateral/security are typically granted to investors in a securitisation in your jurisdiction?

As the Securitisation Law establishes itself a ring-fenced structure, whereby the assigned pool of assets is effectively segregated from the estates of the originator, the issuer and the servicer (as well as of any other transaction parties), it is not usual in Portuguese securitisation transactions to grant security or collateral to investors in securitisation securities. As mentioned above, while in a fund structure this segregation is achieved through the structure itself, as the assets of each fund are only available to meet the liabilities of such fund, in a company structure certain relevant legal provisions establish a full segregation principle and a creditor’s privileged entitlement over the assets that are so segregated and that collateralise a certain issue of notes.

This segregation principle means that the receivables and other related assets and amounts existing at a given moment for the benefit of an STC, and which are related to a certain issuance of notes, constitute an autonomous and ring-fenced pool of assets that is exclusively allocated to such issuance of notes and that is not, therefore, available to creditors of the STC other than the noteholders, and to the service providers existing specifically in the context of such issuance of notes until all the amounts due in respect of the notes have been repaid in full. To this effect, the assets integrated in each pool are listed and filed with the CMVM and subject to an asset identification code that is also granted by the CMVM.

In addition to the above, and in order to render this segregation principle effective, the noteholders and the other creditors relating to each series of securitisation notes issued by the STC are further entitled to a legal creditor’s privilege (equivalent to a security interest) over all of the assets allocated to the relevant issuance of securitisation notes, including assets located outside Portugal. In fact, according to article 63 of the Securitisation Law, this legal special creditor’s privilege exists in respect of all assets forming part of the portfolio allocated to each transaction related to an issuance of notes and therefore has effect over those assets existing at any given moment in time for the benefit of the STC that are allocated to the relevant issuance of securitisation notes.

Also, the provisions of article 60 et seq of the Securitisation Law specifically provides for limited recourse provisions that are valid and binding on the noteholders. Insofar as limited recourse arrangements are concerned, we would furthermore take the view that they correspond to an application in a specific context (that of securitisation) of a possibility of having a contractual limitation on the assets that are liable for certain obligations or debts, which is provided for by Portuguese law on general terms (namely article 602 of the Portuguese Civil Code). Once they result from the quoted provisions of the law, limited recourse shall not be affected by the issuer’s insolvency, however remote, such event may be in the context of the Portuguese securitisation vehicles.

Therefore, other than obtaining the relevant approval for incorporation of the fund or asset digit code approval from the CMVM confirming the applicability of the legal creditor’s privilege in respect of a given portfolio of receivables pertaining to certain notes issued, no additional formalities are required in order to perfect such legal creditor’s privilege, given that it is not subject to registration, in accordance with the Securitisation Law. Additionally, in some transactions, namely those using a securitisation fund, it is usual to create security over the foreign bank accounts of the vehicle, such as escrow accounts or pledge over accounts as being qualified as financial pledge under Decree-Law No. 105/2004 of 8 May 2004 (as amended), in line with the financial collateral arrangements directive. The important characteristic of such financial pledges is that the collateral taker may have the possibility to use and dispose of financial collateral provided as the owner of it.


How is the interest of investors in a securitisation in the underlying security perfected in your jurisdiction?

See question 25.


How do investors enforce their security interest?

See question 25.

Commingling risk

Is commingling risk relating to collections an issue in your jurisdiction?

In accordance with the Securitisation Law, in the event of the servicer becoming insolvent, all the amounts that the servicer may then hold in respect of the loans assigned by the originator to the issuer will not form part of the servicer’s insolvency estate, and the replacement of servicer provisions in the agreement for the servicing of the receivables executed between the issuer and the servicer shall then apply. The procedure separating the relevant estates of the servicer and the securitisation vehicles is a natural consequence of the segregation principle provided in the Securitisation Law, as described in question 25.