Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Raising interest in blockchain based transactions in Germany

By Patrick Scholl on February 25, 2019
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

The past week in Germany has attracted and increased raised interest in blockchain based transactions.

Last week, three announcements brought further attention to the use of blockchain technology for capital market transactions in Germany. Initially, banks focused on the digitalisation of German Schuldschein loan issuances and OTC derivatives. Last week a very first ABCP issuance (see press release) and a plain money market issuance (see press release) via blockchain were published. However, both transactions are not governed by German law (but by Irish and Luxembourg law). In addition, the German regulator BaFin approved a securities prospectus for a public offer to retail investors of a subordinated uncertificated note issuance by a fintech company located in Berlin that is referenced by a token. This decision of BaFin appears to mark a new development in terms of the interpretation of the long established definition of a “security” under the European Prospectus Directive (and the respective definition under MIFID). Even though this definition is a regulatory based term and must therefore not fully be in line with German civil law, there remains a linkage to German civil law in particular when it comes to the question on whether or not the specific debt receivable/instrument is tradable and fungible. However, as German law does not recognise the concept of an uncertificated note to “securitize” a claim, there remains the legal hurdle – without a change to German civil law – to distinguish an uncertificated blockchain based resceivable from a civil law (subordinated) loan claim which by its nature should not be considered to be a security under the European Prospectus Directive. This is of even more importance, if retail investors are involved who could benefit from protections given by German law for creditors under loans granted to corporate lenders. Usually, this interpretation is depends on whether or not the claim is transferred by way of assignment which restricts its qualification as a public faith security under German civil law. If a claim “certified” and transferred by way of blockchain technology is not regarded as a security under the European Prospectus Regulation and MIFID, it can be treated in Germany as a so called Vermögensanlage (investment product) which is  also be subject to a prospectus requirement in case of a distribution to retail clients.

 

Photo of Patrick Scholl Patrick Scholl

Patrick Scholl is a partner and head of Mayer Brown’s Banking & Finance practice in Frankfurt. Patrick leads the Mayer Brown capital markets and derivatives offering in Germany with an European focus. His team advises on debt capital markets issuances and disclosures, debt…

Patrick Scholl is a partner and head of Mayer Brown’s Banking & Finance practice in Frankfurt. Patrick leads the Mayer Brown capital markets and derivatives offering in Germany with an European focus. His team advises on debt capital markets issuances and disclosures, debt issuance programms, hybrid capital instruments as well as liability management transactions. The OTC derivatives practice focuses on advising and negotiating master agreements (including repos and stock lending), collateral solutions, netting questions and provides transaction support with regard to all underylings, including equity-linked, credit-linked, fund-linked or commodity-linked derivatives.

View full profile on MayerBrown.com.

Read more about Patrick SchollEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Technology and AI
  • Blog:
    Retained Interest
  • Organization:
    Mayer Brown

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo