Author:
Mevorach Irit,Walters Adrian
Abstract
AbstractThe decade since the financial crisis has witnessed a proliferation of various ‘light touch’ financial restructuring techniques in the form of so-called pre-insolvency proceedings. These proceedings inhabit a space on the spectrum of insolvency and restructuring law, somewhere between a pure contractual workout, the domain of contract law, and a formal insolvency or rehabilitation proceeding, the domain of insolvency law. While, to date, international insolvency instruments have tended to define insolvency proceedings quite expansively, discussion of the cross-border implications of pre-insolvency proceedings has barely begun. The question is whether pre-insolvency proceedings should qualify as proceedings related to insolvency for the purpose of private international law characterization. The risk is over-inclusivity of cross-border insolvency law, which, where it is based on universality and unity, might defeat contractual expectations. This article argues, however, that we should be slow to exclude pre-insolvency proceedings from cross-border insolvency law: these proceedings are initiated in the zone of insolvency, their effectiveness depends on a statutory mandate and not purely on private ordering, they interact and intersect with formal proceedings, and can benefit from the unique system developed by cross-border insolvency law. We suggest, though, that modified universalism (the leading norm of cross-border insolvency) and international insolvency instruments, should, and are able to, adjust to the peculiarities of pre-insolvency proceedings to address concerns about inclusivity and accommodate pre-insolvency proceedings adequately.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Law,Political Science and International Relations,Business and International Management
Reference59 articles.
1. American Bankruptcy Institute (2014) Commission to Study Reform of Chapter 11: 2012–2014 Final report and recommendations. http://commission.abi.org/full-report. Accessed 25 Sept 2019
2. Antonoff R (2013) Out-of-court debt restructuring and the problem of holdouts and free riders. The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel (October 2013), p 17
3. Araya TM (2016) A decade of sovereign debt litigation: lessons from the NML v Argentina case and the road ahead. Bus Law Int 17(2):83–101
4. Baird DG (2004) The new face of chapter 11. Am Bankruptcy Inst Law Rev 12:69–99
5. Block-Lieb S (2018) Reaching to restructure across borders (without over-reaching), even after Brexit. Am Bankruptcy Law J 92:1–51
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献