Safety should be the primary factor when searching for a document editor on the web. There’s no need to spend time browsing for a trustworthy yet inexpensive service with enough functionality to Bind data in Collateral Agreement. DocHub is just the one you need!
Our tool takes user privacy and data protection into account. It complies with industry standards, like GDPR, CCPA, and PCI DSS, and constantly improves its compliance to become even more hazard-free for your sensitive information. DocHub enables you to set up two-factor authentication for your account configurations (via email, Authenticator App, or Backup codes).
Therefore, you can manage any documentation, including the Collateral Agreement, absolutely securely and without hassles.
Apart from being trustworthy, our editor is also really straightforward to work with. Follow the instruction below and ensure that managing Collateral Agreement with our service will take only a few clicks.
If you often manage your paperwork in Google Docs or need to sign attachments received in Gmail quickly, DocHub is also a good option to choose, as it flawlessly integrates with Google services. Make a one-click file upload to our editor and complete tasks within minutes instead of continuously downloading and re-uploading your document for editing. Try out DocHub today!
This week, Ive been looking at the case of Coleman v Mundell, which was handed down at the end of last month. The case was a dispute about an oral contract. The claimant, Mr C sought specific performance of the contract, which is an order compelling a party to comply with their contractual obligations. It is an equitable remedy and so it is only available at the courts discretion. The facts of this case may be summarised as follows. Mr C, the claimant, had a company which was suffering financial difficulties and he wanted to secure a cash injection into his business. He owned shares in a Spanish entity. The defendant Mr M was Mr Cs friend and also a businessman. Mr C and Mr M had a conversation on the 30th of September 2016. Mr C and Mr M each recalled that conversation differently. At trial, Mr C said that Mr M agreed to make an interest-free loan of 250,000 and that the loan would be secured on Mr Cs shares. Mr M recalled that Mr C had said that M