Each of the fifteen cases has been concluded with comparative observations trying to take stock of the national solutions and to find reasons for at least some of the differences. The purpose of the present evaluation is neither to present a summary of these comparisons nor to give another overview of the law relating to security rights in the different jurisdictions under consideration. Rather, these final remarks aim at drawing a few more general conclusions in view of the need for some measure of European harmonisation that has been identified in the Introduction. Therefore, I will seek to identify common tendencies as well as subsisting differences both with respect to general principles and in relation to specific security devices. The evaluation will conclude with some suggestions as to possible ways for harmonisation.

General tendencies

Common developments

Evolution of secured transactions law outside the Civil Codes

A first, very general, but nonetheless significant common element lies in the fact that the development of secured transactions law on the Continent largely took place (and continues to take place) outside the national Civil Codes.