Banking lawyers and bankers have developed separate terminologies. Frequently a term may have one meaning at law and a different one in every day banking language. For instance, at law a “charge” is a security over assets specified in the documentation. Bankers tend to use “charge” mainly in the context of a security given over assets held by the bank for the account of the customer or of a person who acts as surety. “Lien”, “pledge” “receivables” and “overdrafts” are other cases in point.

Further, many terms readily understood by bankers – such as “put and call options”, “bank products”, “leveraging” and “margin trading” are not used in most works on banking law and need to be explained to a lawyer before he can express an opinion of issues arising in respect of them.

The object of this project was to highlight the nature and the origin of the terminological differences involved and to seek means for ensuring better mutual understanding.