Commentary on Sections Part 2 – Security over Moveable Property Ranking of pledges etc. Section 60 – Ranking
275.This section provides for the priority of payment of secured obligations in a competition between creditors. It applies to both possessory (common law) pledges and statutory pledges, as well as rights in security other than a pledge.
276.Subsection (1) sets out the general rule that a pledge will rank against another security according to when the right is created, and reflects the fundamental principle of property law prior tempore potior jure (earlier by time, stronger by right).
	ExamplePatrick grants a statutory pledge over his painting to Quentin on day one. On day two, Quentin registers the pledge in the Register of Statutory Pledges and this is the final step in creating the pledge. On day three Patrick creates a possessory pledge over the same painting by delivering it to Robert. The statutory pledge ranks before the possessory pledge because the former was created first.
277.Subsection (2) deals with the case of competing statutory pledges where the property was not the provider’s at the time of the pledge being granted. In such cases, registration may not be the final step which creates the pledge – the final piece of the puzzle may be the property becoming the provider’s (see paragraph 224 of these Notes). A system which ranked pledges only according to when they are created would result in them being ranked equally despite one being registered before the other. As such, subsection (2) provides that the key factor in this instance is to be which pledge was registered earlier. For these purposes, only effective registration counts. This provision would apply equally to a statutory pledge created by means of a constitutive document and to one created by means of an amendment document.
278.Subsection (3) regulates the ranking of pledges and of rights in security arising by operation of law (such as the right of a repairer to retain property submitted for repair as security for payment of the bill) so that the right in security has priority. This mirrors the rule between such rights in security and floating charges, as set out in section 464(2) of the Companies Act 1985.
279.Subsection (4) gives a pledge priority for the entirety of the sums secured, both current and future. It follows that there is no procedure under which a party can limit the priority of the secured creditor in a higher ranking pledge by serving a notice to that effect on the creditor (as is the case for standard securities over land under section 13 of the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970)). The effect is that a party seeking a higher ranking security than is otherwise available for sums not yet due under an earlier pledge will have to negotiate a ranking agreement with the creditor in that pledge.
280.Subsections (5) and (6) provide for it to be possible to have a ranking agreement in respect of a pledge and another security right (including another pledge), but it needs to be in writing. Any such agreement will only have contractual effect, and cannot be registered in the Register of Statutory Pledges.