The first part of this article appeared in the previous issue of the Law and Financial Markets Review. The first part described (1) the justifications for imposing liability on lenders for the environmental harms caused by their borrowers; (2) the US experience in regulating lender
liability; and (3) the Israeli law on lender liability in the absence of regulation under theories of environmental law, bank regulation, and the fiduciary duty of banking institutions. This part continues with an examination of tort, corporate law and estoppel by representation theories under
Israeli law for holding lenders liable. It concludes with an analysis of the utility of using legal theories other than direct regulation to impose environmental liability on lenders.
Law and Financial Markets Review is a new, independent, English language journal devoted to providing high quality information, comment and analysis for lawyers specialising in banking and financial market issues and to others with interests in legal and regulatory developments affecting the financial markets. Published bi-monthly LFMR contains articles written by leading experts providing a forum for practical guidance on, as well as reflective and topical analysis of, all major jurisdictions, with a particular focus on the interaction between the law and market practice and behaviour.