The Cape Town Convention And Aviation Financing In Uzbekistan: Legal Framework And Practical Implementation

1.       Economic and Legal Preconditions for the Application of the Cape Town Convention in Uzbekistan

The aviation sector of the Republic of Uzbekistan is currently undergoing an active phase of reform, accompanied by the modernization ofthe aircraft fleet, expansion of the route network, and deeper integration into the international airtransport market. These developments have led to the increasing importance of external financing and leasing mechanisms in the development of the national aviation sector.

The scale of this modernization is confirmed by specific investment decisions made by leading Uzbek air carriers. In particular, Uzbekistan Airways has entered into a firm contract with Boeing for the delivery of 14 wide-body Boeing 787-9 Dreamliner aircraft, with an additional option for eight more aircraft of the same type. Deliveries are scheduled to commence in 2031 and form part of a long-term fleet modernization program aimed at expanding the airline’s long-haul operations. This transaction represents the largest single aircraft acquisition in the history of the national carrier and is intended to strengthen transcontinental routes, including services to North America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region.

At the same time, a program for the renewal of the medium-haul fleet is being implemented. Uzbekistan Airways has signed a letter of intent with ICBC Aviation Leasing for the lease of two Airbus A321neo aircraft, with delivery expected in 2027–2028. By 2028, the airline plans to increase its fleet of this aircraft type to 15 units. The expansion of cooperation with international leasing companies reflects the carrier’s strategic orientation toward the use of international aviation finance mechanisms.

A similar trend can be observed among private carriers. Qanot Sharq has concluded an agreement with Air Lease Corporation for the lease of five Airbus A321neo aircraft (including the XLR and LR variants), with deliveries scheduled for 2026–2027. This acquisition is expected to support the expansion of the airline’s route network to Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Centrum Air (part of Centrum Holding) has also entered into lease agreements with AerCap for the delivery of two Airbus A321neo aircraft in 2027, further demonstrating the involvement of leading global leasing companies in the development of Uzbekistan’s aviation market.

GRATA International Uzbekistan has also been actively involved in the expansion of the national aircraft fleet in recent years, advising foreign lessors, including Avolon, CALC, SMBC Aviation Capital Limited, Nordic Aviation Capital, and Titan Aircraft Leasing, on matters of local law,

including the structuring and execution of aircraft lease agreements and related financing transactions. Since 2023, approximately 25 aircraft have been delivered to Uzbek airlines under lease arrangements, including cargo and passenger Boeing aircraft, various Airbus A320 and A321 configurations, ATR 72-600 aircraft, and other types.

Thus, the development of the aviation sector in Uzbekistan is characterized not by isolated acquisitions but by the systematic expansion of aircraft fleets by both state-owned and private carriers. Given the capital-intensive nature of the aviation industry, the implementation of these projects would not be possible without access to long-term cross-border financing structured through international leasing and credit mechanisms.

In these circumstances, the establishment of an efficient and predictable legal framework for the protection of the rights of creditors and lessors becomes essential for the sustainable development of the national aviation sector.

In this context, the accession of the Republic of Uzbekistan to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment of 16 November 2001 (the “Cape Town Convention”) and the Protocol to the Convention on Matters Specific to Aircraft Equipment, which entered into force on 1 March 2006 (the “Aircraft Protocol”), should not be viewed merely as a formal act of participation in an international treaty. Rather, it represents a strategic step aimed at adapting the national legal system to the mechanisms of international aviation finance and enhancing the investment attractiveness of the Uzbek jurisdiction. From a practical perspective, the principal value of the Cape Town Convention for Uzbekistan lies in the establishment of a legal infrastructure designed to reduce legal risks for international creditors and lessors through the introduction of an autonomous regime of International Interests, operating independently from national systems of property law and registration.

2.          Legal and Institutional Significance of the Ratification of the Cape Town Convention for Uzbekistan

Accession to the Cape Town Convention and Legal Frameworks

Uzbekistan acceded to the Cape Town Convention on 31 January 2018, and its provisions entered into force for the State on 1 May 2018. The legal basis for accession was the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. ZRU-453 dated 28 December 2017.

The practical implementation of the Cape Town Convention in Uzbekistan has been further supported by the adoption of secondary regulatory acts issued by the aviation authorities. In particular, Instruction No. 75 of the Civil Aviation Agency of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated 19 July 2019, titled “On the Procedure for Registration, Revocation and Other Actions in Relation to the Irrevocable Deregistration and Export Request Authorisation” (the “Instruction No. 75”), established the procedures for the registration and implementation of the IDERA mechanism, as well as the procedures for the deregistration and export of aircraft. In this context, the Civil Aviation Agency of the Republic of Uzbekistan (the “Civil Aviation Agency” or “CAA”), acting as the competent state regulator in the field of civil aviation, plays a central role in the implementation of these procedures. The adoption of Instruction No. 75 demonstrates the State’s intention not only to formally recognize the provisions of the Cape Town Convention but also to ensure their practical applicability within the national legal framework.

Declarations Made by the Republic of Uzbekistan upon Accession

Particular importance in assessing the level of implementation of the Cape Town Convention is attached to the analysis of the declarations made by the Republic of Uzbekistan upon accession to the Cape Town Convention and the Aircraft Protocol. Uzbekistan adopted a number of key provisions aimed at strengthening the protection of creditors’ rights.

First, Uzbekistan declared the application of Article VIII of the Aircraft Protocol, which allows the parties to an aviation transaction to choose the governing law. This provision provides flexibility in the legal regulation of international aviation transactions and corresponds to the established practices of the international financial market.

Second, the Republic of Uzbekistan adopted Article XI of the Aircraft Protocol in the form of Alternative A, which regulates remedies in the event of the debtor’s insolvency. The applicable waiting period has been established at 60 days.

The adoption of Alternative A indicates the State’s intention to ensure a high level of legal protection for creditors, as this model imposes stricter obligations on the debtor with respect to the return of the financed aircraft object.

Third, Uzbekistan recognized the IDERA (Irrevocable Deregistration and Export Request Authorisation) mechanism provided for in Article XIII of the Aircraft Protocol. The recognition of IDERA constitutes one of the key elements of the practical application of the Cape Town Convention, as it enables a creditor or lessor to initiate the deregistration and export of an aircraft without the need to obtain additional consent from the debtor.

Fourth, Uzbekistan made a declaration pursuant to Article 54(2) of the Convention allowing creditors to exercise remedies available under the Convention without recourse to the courts where the Convention does not expressly require judicial intervention. This provision establishes the legal basis for the application of self-help remedies, which represent one of the principal advantages of the Cape Town Convention from the perspective of international creditors.

In addition, Uzbekistan declared the application of Article X of the Aircraft Protocol, which provides for expedited relief (speedy relief) for certain creditor remedies. In particular, the time limits for granting such relief are set at no more than 10 days for certain categories of remedies and no more than 30 days for others.

An analysis of these declarations indicates that the Republic of Uzbekistan has adopted a broad range of obligations provided for by the Cape Town Convention and the Aircraft Protocol. From the perspective of formal implementation of international standards for creditor protection, Uzbekistan may therefore be regarded as a jurisdiction with a high level of compliance with the requirements of the Convention.

Supremacy of International Law

An important element of the legal regime governing the application of the Cape Town Convention in Uzbekistan is the principle of the supremacy of international treaties over national legislation in the field of aviation. Pursuant to Article 2 of the Air Code of the Republic of

Uzbekistan, the provisions of an international treaty prevail in the event of a conflict with national legal norms.

This provision establishes the legal basis for the direct application of the mechanisms of the Cape Town Convention within the national legal system and ensures their integration into the regulation of aviation relations.

3.              The   Cape   Town  Convention  as   a   Factor      Enhancing  the       Investment Attractiveness of Uzbekistan’s Aviation Sector

In international practice, a State’s participation in the Cape Town Convention is widely regarded as a key indicator of a jurisdiction’s investment attractiveness, as the effectiveness of the protection of International Interests directly affects the conditions and cost of aviation financing.

For Uzbekistan, where the aviation sector has traditionally relied on leasing models and external sources of capital, the Cape Town Convention functions not merely as an international treaty but also as a systemic component of the legal framework governing aviation financing. It contributes to the creation of a predictable legal environment for participants in aviation transactions.

4.       Requirements under the Legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan Applicable to Aircraft Lease Agreements

Despite the existence of a well-developed international legal framework for the protection of creditors’ rights provided by the Cape Town Convention, the implementation of aviation transactions in Uzbekistan is largely determined by national legislation and administrative procedures. This necessitates an analysis of the legal particularities governing the conclusion of aircraft lease agreements in the Uzbek jurisdiction, which represent the primary legal instrument for the acquisition and operation of aircraft due to the capital-intensive nature of aviation assets.

General Legal Framework of Aircraft Leasing

Aircraft lease agreements in the Republic of Uzbekistan are governed by the general provisions of civil legislation, including the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. 427-XII dated 19 November 1991 “On Lease” (the “Law on Lease”). At the same time, the legislation does not contain a specific regulatory act establishing particular legal requirements applicable exclusively to aircraft leasing.

The general rules provide that a lease agreement must specify essential terms relating to the subject matter of the agreement, the lease term, the amount and procedure for payment of lease rentals, the procedure for the transfer and redelivery of the leased property, as well as the allocation of obligations regarding its maintenance and repair.

However, where an aircraft lease agreement is governed by foreign law, practice demonstrates that the above-mentioned requirements of national legislation are not formally mandatory, except for provisions of a mandatory nature that apply irrespective of the governing law chosen by the parties. At the same time, from a practical perspective, most of the provisions prescribed under Uzbek law correspond to the standard structure of international aircraft lease agreements, allowing the parties to take national requirements into account without significant difficulty when structuring the transaction.

Formal Requirements and Currency Regulation

In addition to the above requirements, Uzbek legislation establishes several formal conditions applicable to aircraft lease agreements arising from currency control and foreign trade regulations. In particular, the agreement must be executed in written form and duly signed by the parties.

Aircraft lease agreements concluded with foreign legal entities are generally qualified as foreign trade contracts and are therefore subject to the requirements of Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. 283 dated 14 May 2020 “On Measures for Further Improvement of Monitoring of Foreign Trade Operations in the Republic of Uzbekistan” (the “Resolution No. 283”).

Content Requirements of Lease Agreements

Under Resolution No. 283, an agreement executed in a foreign language must be translated into the state language (Uzbek). At the same time, established practice allows the use of Russian or bilingual versions of agreements, reflecting the practical realities of international aviation transactions. The agreement must contain a preamble, details of the parties, the place and date of execution, the subject matter of the agreement, the terms of delivery and transfer of the aircraft, the timeframes for the performance of obligations, the total contract value and the method for its calculation, payment terms, the country of origin of the object of the contract, as well as the parties’ details and other minimum content requirements.

Registration in the UEISFTO and Currency Control

An additional requirement established by Resolution No. 283 is the registration of aircraft lease agreements in the Unified Electronic Information System of Foreign Trade Operations (the “UEISFTO”). In the event of amendments to the terms of the agreement, such amendments must be formalized through a supplemental agreement and registered in the UEISFTO in the same manner as the principal contract.

Apart from registration in the UEISFTO, the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan does not provide for any other mandatory forms of state registration of aircraft lease agreements. Nevertheless, such agreements must be submitted to the servicing bank within the framework of currency control procedures prior to the execution of cross-border payments under the relevant agreements.

Interaction with the Civil Aviation Agency

Additionally, in practice, aircraft lease agreements are often submitted to the CAA as part of procedures related to the issuance or reissuance of operational and registration documents for the aircraft. Such submission does not constitute state registration of the agreement as such. However, it effectively forms part of the administrative procedures accompanying the operation of aircraft within the national jurisdiction.

At the same time, the current legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan does not require the mandatory registration of transactions involving aircraft (including aircraft lease agreements) in the state register of civil aircraft, which distinguishes the Uzbek regulatory model from that of a number of other jurisdictions.

Specifics of Lease Agreements with State-Owned Companies

Particular attention should be given to the specific procedures applicable to the conclusion of aircraft lease agreements where the lessees are state-owned companies, in particular JSC “Uzbekistan Airways” and LLC “Uzbekistan Helicopters.”

Agreements entered into by state-owned companies are subject to review and approval by the State Unitary Enterprise “Center for Comprehensive Expertise of Projects and Import Contracts” under the Ministry of Economy and Finance of the Republic of Uzbekistan (the “Center”), as well as registration with this body, pursuant to Resolution of the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. PP-332 dated 25 July 2022 “On Measures for Further Improvement of the Procedure for the Examination of Pre-Project Documentation of Investment and Infrastructure Projects, Tender Procurement Documentation, Terms of Reference for Public Procurement and Contracts” (the “Resolution No. 332”). This body conducts legal, economic, and technical reviews of the terms of the relevant agreements, including their compliance with national legislation, currency regulation requirements, and the State’s foreign trade policy.

The approval procedure involves the preliminary review of the draft agreement by the Center prior to its execution. Resolution No. 332 also establishes certain requirements regarding the content of agreements concluded by state-owned companies with foreign counterparties, including the requirement to reflect the key commercial and financial terms of the transaction. After the agreement is executed, and provided that prior approval from the Center has been obtained, the state-owned company must submit the executed agreement to the Center within the prescribed period (within one month) for registration and confirmation of its compliance with the previously approved terms in order to obtain the Center’s final positive opinion. Failure to comply with this requirement effectively prevents the implementation of the agreement, including the performance of obligations and the execution of payments. The same procedure applies to any supplemental agreements.

Furthermore, practice demonstrates that aviation transactions involving state-owned companies are often initiated and implemented pursuant to decisions or instructions issued by the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan, which results in an additional level of administrative oversight over the terms and parameters of the relevant agreements. Moreover, such transactions are also subject to public procurement procedures. The applicability of public procurement legislation in this context stems from the fact that state-owned airlines act as public procuring entities and acquire goods and services within the framework of their commercial activities, while also frequently implementing projects provided for under state programs or pursuant to decisions of the President and the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan.

It should be noted that the procedure for obtaining the Center’s approval is complex and multi-stage, which may significantly extend the timeline for the conclusion of aviation transactions. Consequently, the requirement to undergo this procedure effectively constitutes an additional administrative layer in the implementation of international aviation projects.

5.        Security Mechanisms (Securities) in Aviation Transactions in the Republic of Uzbekistan

The administrative procedures and regulatory mechanisms described above determine not only the process for concluding aviation transactions in Uzbekistan but also the specific allocation of

risks among the parties involved in such transactions. In this context, the legal regime governing security mechanisms aimed at protecting the interests of creditors and lessors becomes particularly important. An analysis of the system of securities in aviation transactions makes it possible to assess the extent to which Uzbek law ensures the effective protection of creditors’ rights.

General Overview of Security Interests

It should be noted that Uzbek legislation does not contain special provisions regulating security interests specifically in relation to aircraft. Accordingly, such relationships are governed by the general provisions of civil legislation relating to the security of obligations, including pledges, assignments of rights, and other contractual arrangements.

Uzbek law recognizes the security rights of creditors arising from aviation agreements. These rights are subject to legal protection and may be implemented through mechanisms such as security assignments, pledges (including mortgages), and subordination of rights.

Security Assignment

In international aviation finance practice, one of the key security mechanisms is the assignment of rights by way of security (security assignment). This includes the assignment of rights and benefits under an aircraft lease agreement, as well as rights under related agreements, in favor of a security trustee acting on behalf of a creditor or a group of creditors.

From the perspective of Uzbek law, an assignment as such is not recognized as an independent form of security. As a result, the structure of a security assignment is typically treated as a conditional assignment of rights, which becomes effective upon the occurrence of certain circumstances, most notably events of default.

Despite the absence of explicit statutory regulation, assignments of rights for security purposes are generally permissible under Uzbek law. In practice, such agreements are typically concluded between foreign parties (for example, between the lessor and a security trustee) and are governed by foreign law. Uzbek legislation recognizes the principle of party autonomy in the choice of governing law, and therefore such agreements should generally be recognized as valid and enforceable in accordance with their governing law.

At the same time, Uzbek law does not establish specific formal requirements for assignments by way of security, except that the assignment must be executed in the same form as the underlying aircraft lease agreement. The consent of the lessee to the assignment of rights is generally not required unless otherwise stipulated in the agreement itself. However, notifying the lessee of the assignment is of significant practical importance. In the absence of such notification, the new creditor bears the risk of adverse consequences, including the lessee’s right to continue performing its obligations to the original creditor until proper notice of the assignment has been received. This principle is reflected in Article 316 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan.

Recent transactional practice in Uzbekistan indicates that security assignment mechanisms are commonly used in aircraft lease transactions. In particular, such assignments are often structured in the form of tri-partite deeds between the lessor, the security trustee, and the Uzbek lessee, which reflects the requirements of Uzbek law. Where the lessee is a state- owned Uzbek company, the relevant agreements are subject to review and approval by the Center, and must

also be registered in the UEISFTO, regardless of whether the Uzbek counterparty is a state-owned enterprise.

Assignment of Insurances and Reinsurances (AOI/AOR)

In addition, common mechanisms used in aviation transactions include assignment of insurances (AOI) and assignment of reinsurances (AOR). In order to ensure their effectiveness, the lessor is typically designated as an additional beneficiary (second beneficiary) under the relevant insurance policy, a tri-partite agreement on the assignment of rights under the insurance contracts is executed, and the relevant agreements are registered in the UEISFTO.

Although there is currently no established judicial practice regarding the enforcement of these mechanisms, their widespread use in aviation transactions in recent years suggests that, provided they are properly structured and documented, AOI/AOR and security assignments are capable of functioning effectively within the Uzbek legal framework.

Pledge as a Security Mechanism

Pledge remains the classical form of security under the law of the Republic of Uzbekistan, including mortgage-type security interests. Under the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. 614- Idated 1 May 1998 “On Pledge” (the “Law on Pledge”), the subject of a pledge may include any property, including tangible assets and proprietary rights (claims), except for property withdrawn from civil circulation and claims that are inseparably connected with the personality of the creditor and therefore non-assignable by law.

Despite the existence of a statutory framework, the use of pledges over aircraft in aviation transactions in Uzbekistan remains relatively limited. This is primarily due to the fact that an aircraft operated by a local airline is typically not owned by the operator and therefore cannot be pledged as security for the operator’s obligations. Furthermore, the state register of civil aircraft does not function as a registry of property rights and is not designed to record security interests or transactions involving aircraft.

In practice, pledges over aircraft in Uzbekistan are most commonly encountered in situations where local airlines, primarily state-owned carriers, purchase aircraft using financing provided by Uzbek banks and subsequently pledge the acquired aircraft as security for their repayment obligations. At the same time, Uzbek legislation does not restrict foreign lessors from granting security over aircraft owned by them and operated by Uzbek airlines in favor of foreign creditors under foreign law.

Subordination of Rights

In addition to the mechanisms described above, contractual subordination of rights is widely used in international aviation finance practice. This structure typically takes the form of an agreement among the participants in an aviation transaction establishing the contractual priority of claims among different creditors or parties within the financing structure.

The essence of subordination lies in the fact that certain rights or claims of the parties under aviation agreements are contractually subordinated to the rights of other participants in the

transaction. Such provisions are particularly common in financing structures involving multiple layers of lease or sublease arrangements for the same aircraft.

From the perspective of Uzbek law, subordination of rights is a purely contractual mechanism based on the principle of freedom of contract. Such agreements are typically governed by foreign law, which expressly recognizes the possibility of contractual subordination of claims. In cross-border aviation transactions, this allows the parties to allocate risks efficiently without creating additional proprietary security interests within the national legal system.

It should be emphasized that subordination of rights does not replace the creditor protection mechanisms established under the Cape Town Convention. Rather, it performs a complementary function by regulating the internal relationships among participants in the financing structure, while the priority of rights in respect of the aircraft itself is determined through the system of registration of International Interests in the International Registry pursuant to the Cape Town Convention and the Aircraft Protocol.

6.      Rights of Detention in Respect of Aircraft in Uzbekistan

The existence of detention rights and other non-consensual rights of third parties is traditionally regarded as one of the key legal risk factors in aviation financing. Uzbek civil legislation provides for a general right of a creditor to retain possession of the debtor’s property until the underlying obligation has been performed. By its legal nature, this mechanism is similar to a possessory lien and may arise, for example, in relation to unpaid airport charges, ground handling services or aviation fuel supplies.

At the same time, national legislation does not establish a detailed legal regime specifically governing the detention of leased aircraft. The relevant statutory provisions are formulated with reference to the “property of the debtor”, which leaves open the question of whether such rights may be exercised in respect of aircraft owned by a third party (the lessor) but operated by the airline-lessee. As of today, there is no established judicial practice in Uzbekistan addressing this issue.

Judicial Arrest of Aircraft

A similar degree of uncertainty may also arise in relation to the judicial arrest of aircraft. Procedural legislation allows courts to impose arrest over a debtor’s property as an interim protective measure. In practice, this raises the question of whether such measures may be applied to aircraft owned by third parties but placed at the disposal of the debtor. An additional complication stems from the absence of a special procedural regime governing the arrest of aircraft under Uzbek law, with such matters instead regulated by the general rules applicable to interim measures. The absence of established judicial practice makes it difficult to assess the corresponding legal risks with certainty.

Role of the Cape Town Convention

In these circumstances, the Cape Town Convention plays a central role in regulating issues related to the detention and repossession of aircraft in Uzbekistan. In practice, the Convention effectively forms the primary international legal framework governing the detention of aviation assets in the event of default under lease agreements.

Pursuant to Article 10 of the Cape Town Convention, upon the occurrence of a default under a lease agreement the creditor may terminate the agreement and take possession or control of the aircraft object, or apply to the court for an order authorizing such actions.

Particular importance should be attached to the declaration made by the Republic of Uzbekistan under Article 54(2) of the Cape Town Convention, pursuant to which all remedies available to a creditor under the Cape Town Convention that are not expressly required to be exercised through the courts may be exercised without judicial action and without the permission of the court. This declaration provides the legal basis for the extra-judicial repossession and detention of aircraft.

Practical Implementation of the Cape Town Convention in Uzbekistan

Practical experience confirms that the mechanisms established by the Cape Town Convention are not merely formal in nature. In particular, in the widely discussed case involving Panorama Airways, which concerned the airline’s failure to fulfil its payment obligations under a lease agreement, the lessor exercised its rights under the Cape Town Convention through interaction with the CAA, with legal support provided by GRATA International Uzbekistan. Following the submission of the documentation required under the Cape Town Convention and its verification by the CAA, the Civil Aviation Agency issued a grounding request within a short period of time (two calendar days), effectively suspending the operation of the aircraft and prohibiting the airline from performing flights. This measure enabled the lessor to effectively exercise its rights in respect of the aircraft. This example demonstrates the practical enforceability of the Cape Town Convention mechanisms within the Uzbek jurisdiction.

It should also be noted that national legislation provides detailed procedures governing the deregistration and export of aircraft, which further establishes the institutional framework necessary for the implementation of the Cape Town Convention.

Accordingly, despite the relatively limited development of national rules governing the detention of aircraft, the Cape Town Convention effectively plays a system-forming role in regulating issues of detention and repossession of aviation assets in Uzbekistan, ensuring a higher level of predictability and protection for creditors and lessors.

7.     Registration of Aircraft in Uzbekistan

As in many other jurisdictions, the legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan requires the mandatory registration of aircraft, including passenger aircraft, in a specially established state register. In Uzbekistan, this function is performed by the State Register of Civil Aircraft of the Republic of Uzbekistan (the “Register”), which is maintained by and falls within the authority of the CAA.

A mandatory condition for registering an aircraft in the Register is that the aircraft must not be registered in the aircraft register of any other foreign state, as provided for in Article 39 of the Air Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Accordingly, where an aircraft is delivered to Uzbekistan for operation by, or transfer of ownership to, Uzbek airlines and was previously registered in another jurisdiction, it must first be deregistered from the foreign register before it can be registered in the Register of the Republic of Uzbekistan.

Registration Procedure

Registration is carried out in the name of the aircraft owner. Upon completion of the registration procedure, the CAA issues a Certificate of State Registration and assigns a national registration mark to the aircraft. The registration certificate contains information about both the aircraft and its owner.

At the same time, the Register itself structurally includes separate sections containing information about the owner and the operator of the aircraft. As a result, it may be noted that the Uzbek model combines elements of owner-based and operator-based record keeping, although, as noted above, registration is legally effected in the name of the owner. In addition, the CAA maintains separate registers according to aircraft type and manufacturer (for example, Airbus, Boeing, ATR, Il, Tu and others), which reflects the organizational and technical nature of the registration system and its focus on operational aspects of aircraft use.

It should be emphasized that registration of an aircraft in Uzbekistan does not constitute evidence of ownership and does not have a proprietary (in rem) legal effect. Uzbek law does not require the registration of transactions relating to aircraft (including leases, mortgages or other encumbrances) in the Register. Instead, registration performs primarily an administrative and technical function, confirming that the aircraft is authorized to operate within the airspace of the Republic of Uzbekistan.

Registration Procedure and Required Documents

The procedure for registering a civil aircraft in the Register is governed by Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. 86 dated 22 February 2022 “On Approval of the Unified Regulation on the Procedure for Issuing Certain Permits through a Special Electronic System”. Under this Resolution, the owner (applicant) must submit the following documents to obtain a registration certificate:

• an application specifying (a) the full name of the legal entity (applicant); (b) information about the aircraft, including the aircraft type, manufacturer’s serial number, date of manufacture, aircraft manufacturer, maximum take-off weight, manufacturer, type and number of installed engines, and the aircraft’s base of operation; and (c) information about the owner, including the full legal name and legal form of the entity, registered address and contact details (telephone number and e-mail address);
• a Type Certificate for the aircraft;
• copies of documents confirming ownership or other proprietary rights in the aircraft (including sale and purchase agreements, lease agreements, bills of sale, );
• a document confirming the deregistration of the aircraft from the aircraft register of a foreign state;
• an Export Certificate of Airworthiness, where the aircraft is imported into the Republic of Uzbekistan from a foreign jurisdiction.

Prior to registration in the Register, the aircraft is subject to a technical inspection carried out by representatives of the CAA in order to assess its condition and airworthiness. Following the inspection, a technical inspection report is issued. Such inspection may also be conducted outside the territory of Uzbekistan.

Timeframes and Grounds for Refusal

The registration procedure takes up to 10 working days from the date of submission of the application. Where the inspection of the aircraft is conducted outside Uzbekistan, this period may be extended up to 30 working days. Registration may be refused if the aircraft fails to meet the established requirements. These requirements include, inter alia:

• compliance of the aircraft with the airworthiness standards applicable to the relevant aircraft type;
• operation of the aircraft within the limits of its established service life and operational resources;
• absence of structural modifications that may pose a threat to flight safety;
• compliance with the aviation regulations of the Republic of

State Fees for Aircraft Registration

Registration of an aircraft in the Register requires the payment of state fees. The fee for reviewing the application ranges from 63.7 to 75.8 basic calculation values (BCV) (approximately USD 2,150 to USD 2,560). The issuance of the registration certificate itself is subject to an additional fee of

7.8 BCV (approximately USD 260).

8.      Additional Aviation Certificates Required for Aircraft Operation

In addition to the Certificate of State Registration, the operation of an aircraft in Uzbekistan requires obtaining several additional aviation documents, including a Certificate of Airworthiness, aNoise Certificate, and a Radio Equipment Certificate. These documents confirm that the aircraft complies with the applicable aviation standards and flight safety requirements.

Certificate of Airworthiness

In particular, the Certificate of Airworthiness confirms that the aircraft meets the established technical requirements and may be safely operated in civil aviation. This document is issued by the CAA following an inspection of the aircraft’s technical condition and verification of its compliance with the applicable aviation regulations. The state fee for the issuance of this certificate ranges from 153.7 to 278.3 basic calculation values (BCV), which is approximately USD 5,200–9,415.

Noise Certificate

The Noise Certificate confirms that the aircraft complies with international environmental standards relating to aircraft noise, including those established by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Possession of this certificate is a prerequisite for performing flights in international airspace and for operating aircraft at most international airports. The state fee for obtaining this certificate ranges from 41.1 to 54 BCV (approximately USD 1,390–1,830).

Radio Equipment Certificate

The Radio Equipment Certificate confirms that the radio communication and navigation equipment installed on the aircraft complies with aviation safety requirements and aviation

communication standards necessary to ensure safe interaction between the aircraft and air traffic control authorities. The state fee for issuing this certificate ranges from 45.64 to 67.3 BCV (approximately USD 1,545–2,280).

Issuance Timeframes and Costs of Certificates

The issuance period for each of the above certificates is up to 10 working days. Where the inspection of the aircraft is conducted outside the territory of Uzbekistan, this period may be extended up to 30 working days. In addition, the fee for issuing each of the above certificates amounts to 7.8 BCV (approximately USD 260), which corresponds to the fee charged for issuing the Certificate of State Registration of the aircraft.

Legal Significance of Certificates

The absence of these certificates makes it impossible to operate the aircraft in civil aviation in the Republic of Uzbekistan, as an aircraft may not be authorized to perform flights without confirmation of its compliance with airworthiness, environmental and aviation communication requirements.

Overall, the state registration of aircraft in the Republic of Uzbekistan is primarily administrative and technical in nature and is aimed at ensuring state oversight over flight safety and the operation of aviation equipment. The Register performs the function of recording aircraft authorized to operate within the airspace of the Republic of Uzbekistan, as well as recording information regarding their owners and operators.

Accordingly, the aircraft registration system in Uzbekistan is primarily oriented toward aviation oversight and operational regulation, rather than toward regulating proprietary rights or security interests in aviation transactions.

9.      General (National) Deregistration Procedure

The removal of a civil aircraft from the Register is carried out by the CAA on the basis of an application submitted by the applicant together with the required set of documents.

Grounds for Deregistration

The grounds for deregistration may include:

• withdrawal of the aircraft from service;
• decommissioning of the aircraft;
• sale or transfer of the aircraft to a foreign state or to a foreign legal entity or individual;
• transfer of the aircraft to state or experimental

Application Requirements

The application must contain information about the aircraft (including the aircraft type, registration marks, manufacturer’s serial number, manufacturer, maximum take-off weight, and the manufacturer, type and number of installed engines), as well as information about the owner and, where applicable, the new owner and the state of future registration. In addition, the application must indicate one of the above-mentioned grounds for deregistration.

The application shall be accompanied by the original versions of previously issued documents, including:

• the Certificate of State Registration;
• the Certificate of Airworthiness;
• the Noise Certificate;
• the Radio Equipment Certificate;
• as well as documents confirming the removal of the aircraft’s 24-bit ICAO address from the aircraft radio equipment system, deletion of the relevant record in the SELCAL (ASRI) system, and removal of emergency locator transmitters from the COSPAS-SARSAT

Timeframes and Fees for Deregistration

The applicable fee is equivalent to the fee charged for aircraft registration and depends onthe aircraft’s maximum take-off weight. The fee ranges from 63.7 to 75.8 BCV for the review ofthe application (approximately USD 2,150 to USD 2,560), together with 7.8 BCV (approximately USD 260) for the issuance of the relevant administrative document.

The review period for the application, similar to the period applicable to aircraft registration, is up to 10 working days, which may be extended to 30 working days.

Correlation with the IDERA mechanism

However, the general deregistration procedure is not the only mechanism through which aforeign lessor may remove an aircraft from the Register of the Republic of Uzbekistan and subsequently export it from the country. In practice, the lessor may also rely on the IDERA mechanism. Accordingly, it is necessary to distinguish between the national administrative deregistration procedure and the special deregistration mechanism implemented through IDERA.

Although both procedures are interconnected and formally aimed at removing the aircraft from the Register, their legal nature and functional purpose differ. The national deregistration procedure is primarily focused on the operational status of the aircraft and matters of aviation administration and is not directly related to the protection of creditors’ rights.

By contrast, the IDERA mechanism represents a special legal instrument incorporated into national regulation as a result of the declaration made by the Republic of Uzbekistan pursuant to Article XXX(1) of the Aircraft Protocol to the Cape Town Convention. Its primary purpose is to ensure the efficient and expedited enforcement of the rights of a creditor or lessor in the event of default.

Thus, while national deregistration constitutes an element of aviation administration, the IDERA mechanism functions as an international legal instrument for the protection of secured interests, integrated into the national registration system but having an independent legal basis and a distinct functional role.

10.        Deregistration under IDERA

Pursuant to the declaration made by the Republic of Uzbekistan regarding the application of Articles VIII, XII and XIII of the Aircraft Protocol in accordance with Article XXX(1) of the Aircraft Protocol, the national legal framework incorporates the mechanism of the IDERA, which constitutes an irrevocable authorization for the deregistration of an aircraft and its export.

Within the framework of aviation transactions, the lessor (owner) of the aircraft is required to ensure, in advance, that an IDERA is issued in favor of an Authorized Party for the purpose of regaining control over the aircraft and exporting it from the territory of the Republic of Uzbekistan upon the occurrence of the relevant circumstances specified in the underlying agreement. The issued IDERA must be registered with the CAA. The existence of a registered IDERA means that only the Authorized Party is entitled to initiate the procedure for deregistration of the aircraft and its subsequent export.

Formal Requirements for IDERA

The legislation establishes several requirements concerning the form and content of an IDERA. In particular, it must be executed in writing, contain the identification details of the aircraft registered or to be registered in the Register, and be signed by the lessor (owner) of the aircraft.

Authorized Party and Certified Designee

In addition, the Authorized Party, in whose favor the IDERA is issued, may appoint a special representative - a Certified Designee. Such a person acts on behalf of the Authorized Party in exercising the rights provided under the IDERA, including submitting applications for the deregistration of the aircraft, interacting with the CAA, and carrying out procedures related to the export of the aircraft from the territory of the Republic of Uzbekistan. The appointment of a Certified Designee must be registered with the CAA on the basis of an application submitted by the Authorized Party, after which information regarding such person is recorded in the Register.

At the same time, the appointment of a Certified Designee is derivative in nature from the powers of the Authorized Party and may be revoked in accordance with the established procedure. The appointment or revocation of a Certified Designee does not affect the validity of the IDERA itself and does not terminate the rights granted under it.

Deregistration Procedure under IDERA

In furtherance of these provisions, the CAA adopted Instruction No. 75, which sets out in detail the procedure for exercising the lessor’s rights to deregister an aircraft.

Under Instruction No. 75:

• the application for deregistration is submitted by the Authorized Party in whose favor the IDERA has been issued, or by its representative;
• the CAA is required to review the application and carry out the deregistration within five working days upon receipt of the complete set of required documents;
• no additional court decision, consent of the lessee, or other administrative approvals are

For the application to be accepted by the CAA, the following conditions must be satisfied:

• the IDERA must be registered in the Register;
• the Authorized Party must confirm the absence of International Interests having priority, or provide evidence of the consent of the holders of such interests;
• interested parties must be notified at least 10 working days prior to submission of the deregistration request;
• the original IDERA or a notarized copy, powers of attorney (if applicable), and documents confirming the legal capacity of the applicant must be submitted;

• the CAA must issue a Certificate of Deregistration and take all measures within its authority to facilitate the export of the

Accordingly, the Uzbek model of IDERA-based deregistration generally corresponds to the standards established by the Cape Town Convention and provides for an expedited and extra-judicial procedure for enforcing the rights of creditors or lessors.

Export Certificate of Airworthiness

A particularly important element of this procedure is the Export Certificate of Airworthiness, which is also issued in accordance with Instruction No. 75.

In order to export an aircraft from the territory of the Republic of Uzbekistan, the Authorized Party must obtain an Export Certificate of Airworthiness issued by the CAA. The certificate is issued within 15 calendar days, subject to compliance with the applicable requirements, and remains valid for one month.

A significant feature of this procedure is that the aircraft must remain registered for the purpose of obtaining the Export Certificate of Airworthiness. Consequently, in practice the export certificate is obtained first, and only thereafter is the final deregistration initiated. Since deregistration under the IDERA procedure is designed to be completed within five working days, the deregistration request should be submitted only once the aircraft is fully prepared for export. In practice, however, the deregistration process may take longer and may extend to approximately one month, primarily because the CAA verifies that the aircraft is free from outstanding debts or other violations that could prevent deregistration.

During the validity period of the Export Certificate of Airworthiness, the Authorized Party must ensure the actual export of the aircraft from the territory of the Republic of Uzbekistan. While no export duties apply to aircraft, certain export formalities may still need to be completed.

Lack of Practice and Assessment of Effectiveness

As of the date of preparation of this article, no publicly known cases exist in which aircraft have been deregistered from the national register of Uzbekistan with the simultaneous issuance of an Export Certificate of Airworthiness under the IDERA procedure. Accordingly, the practical implementation of these mechanisms remains to some extent untested in judicial or administrative practice.

Nevertheless, the regulatory framework contains a detailed procedural mechanism consistent with the requirements of the Cape Town Convention, providing a formal basis for the efficient enforcement of the rights of lessors and other secured creditors.

11.    Conclusion

The analysis of the legal framework governing aviation financing in the Republic of Uzbekistan indicates the formation of a complex and largely hybrid regulatory model, combining elements of national administrative law with international treaty-based mechanisms.

The accession of the Republic of Uzbekistan to the Cape Town Convention and the Aircraft Protocol should not be regarded as a merely formal implementation of an international treaty, but rather as a systemic step toward integrating the national aviation sector into the global infrastructure of aviation finance. The declarations adopted by Uzbekistan, including the application of Alternative A, the recognition of the IDERA mechanism, and the possibility of exercising creditor remedies without judicial intervention, have significantly enhanced the predictability and investment attractiveness of the Uzbek jurisdiction.

At the same time, national regulation retains a pronounced administrative character. Aircraft registration primarily performs a technical function and does not serve as a registry of proprietary rights or encumbrances. National mechanisms for securing obligations and exercising detention rights are not fully adapted to the needs of cross-border aviation financing structures. In this context, the mechanisms established by the Cape Town Convention play a decisive role in protecting the rights of creditors, including the system of registration of International Interests and the procedure for aircraft deregistration based on IDERA.

Particular importance should be attached to the fact that Uzbek legislation has not only formally incorporated the provisions of the Cape Town Convention, but has also adopted detailed secondary regulations (notably Instruction No. 75) ensuring the practical implementation of an expedited and extra-judicial deregistration procedure. The emerging practice of applying these mechanisms confirms their functionality and demonstrates a transition from the declarative recognition of international standards to their practical implementation.

At the same time, several institutional and procedural features remain, including administrative oversight in transactions involving state-owned companies, currency-monitoring requirements, and the absence of well-established legal practice concerning non-consensual rights of third parties. These factors shape a specific jurisdictional risk profile that must be taken into account by participants in aviation transactions.

Overall, the legal system of the Republic of Uzbekistan demonstrates a consistent trend toward harmonization with international standards of aviation financing. Within the Uzbek regulatory framework, the Cape Town Convention performs not an auxiliary but a system-forming role, compensating for the limitations of national proprietary law mechanisms and ensuring the predictability of protection for creditors and lessors.

Thus, it may be concluded that Uzbekistan has established a legal framework enabling international aviation transactions to be carried out at a level comparable to that of other Cape Town Convention jurisdictions, while maintaining certain national features of administrative regulation. The further development of legal and administrative practice will play a key role in strengthening the confidence of international financial institutions and aircraft leasing companies in the Uzbek jurisdiction.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.