| Example: An Italian bank issues a letter of credit that is |
confirmed by a New York bank. The beneficiary is a Connecticut |
corporation. The letter of credit provides that the issuer's |
liability is governed by Italian law, and the confirmation |
provides that the confirmer's liability is governed by the law of |
New York. Under Sections 9-306(b) [Maine cite section 9-1306, |
subsection (2)] and 5-116(a), Italy is the issuer's jurisdiction |
and New York is the confirmer's (nominated person's) |
jurisdiction. Because the confirmer's jurisdiction is a State, |
the law of New York governs perfection and priority of a security |
interest in the beneficiary's letter-of-credit right against the |
confirmer. See Section 9-306(a) [Maine cite section 9-1306, |
subsection (1)]. However, because the issuer's jurisdiction is |
not a State, the law of that jurisdiction does not govern. See |
Section 9-306(a) [Maine cite section 9-1306, subsection (1)]. |
Rather, the choice-of-law rule in Section 9-301(1) [Maine cite |
section 9-1301, subsection (1)] applies to perfection and |
priority of a security interest in the beneficiary's letter-of- |
credit right against the issuer. Under that section, perfection |
and priority are governed by the law of the jurisdiction in which |
the debtor (beneficiary) is located. That jurisdiction is |
Connecticut. See Section 9-307 [Maine cite section 9-1307]. |