Typical bank collateral can, according to case law, lead to the inclusion of the lender in the scope of the capital replacement law. This raises a multitude of unanswered questions: How must a lien on the borrower's shares be structured, and what covenants need to be agreed upon to qualify the lender as a quasi-partner? The work outlines the scope of the capital replacement law using the example of project financing. It examines whether the boundaries of the capital replacement law are shifting due to the MoMiG, whether the risks of the capital replacement law can be limited by the emergence of a limited company as the borrower, and whether the quasi-partner is supported by the statutory privilege provisions.