首页 > 最新文献

Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal最新文献

英文 中文
Lehman Brothers: A License to Fail with Other People’s Money 雷曼兄弟:拿着别人的钱失败的许可证
Pub Date : 2011-12-08 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2003618
Mark P. Denbeaux, Edward Dabek, John Gregorek, Sean A. Kennedy, E. Miller
The bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (“Lehman”) is the largest bankruptcy ever filed, with losses to investors, both small and large, totaling billions of dollars. In January 2008, Lehman Brothers, heavily invested in by pension plans such as the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the New York State Teachers Retirement Plan, traded at a high of over $65 per share. At that time, Lehman reported record numbers of nearly $60 billion in revenue and more than $4 billion in earnings. However, a mere eight months later, Lehman’s stock was trading under $4 per share, and on September 12, 2008, Lehman filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.The Bankruptcy Court appointed an Examiner to investigate and report on Lehman’s business affairs, with particular regard to “any fact ascertained pertaining to fraud, dishonesty, incompetence, misconduct, mismanagement, or irregularity in the management of the affairs of the debtor, or to a cause of action available to the estate.” The Examiner’s findings, taken at face value, reveal that the legal system that allowed Lehman’s failure will permit similar failures in the future because, for the most part, Lehman’s actions did not violate the law.This report explores Lehman’s risk management in a declining market and the valuation of its assets. Lehman, after recognizing the magnitude of the economic crisis, doubled-down on its risk, dramatically increasing the amount it was prepared to lose, while also disguising the declining value of its assets. These acts were not inadvertent, but rather were deliberate violations of internal risk limits and conscious overvaluations of its assets.
雷曼兄弟控股公司(“雷曼”)的破产是有史以来最大的破产案,给大大小小的投资者造成了总计数十亿美元的损失。2008年1月,受到加州公共雇员退休系统和纽约州教师退休计划等养老金计划大量投资的雷曼兄弟股价达到每股65美元以上的高点。当时,雷曼兄弟公布了创纪录的近600亿美元营收和逾40亿美元利润。然而,仅仅八个月后,雷曼兄弟的股价就跌破每股4美元,并于2008年9月12日申请破产保护。破产法院指定了一名审查员对雷曼的商业事务进行调查和报告,特别是关于“任何与债务人事务管理中的欺诈、不诚实、无能、不当行为、管理不善或不合规有关的事实,或对遗产的诉讼理由。”从表面上看,审查员的调查结果表明,允许雷曼破产的法律体系将允许未来出现类似的破产,因为在很大程度上,雷曼的行为并没有违反法律。本报告探讨了雷曼在市场下滑中的风险管理及其资产估值。在认识到经济危机的严重性后,雷曼兄弟将风险加倍,大幅增加了它准备损失的金额,同时还掩盖了其资产价值的下降。这些行为不是无意的,而是故意违反内部风险限制和有意高估其资产。
{"title":"Lehman Brothers: A License to Fail with Other People’s Money","authors":"Mark P. Denbeaux, Edward Dabek, John Gregorek, Sean A. Kennedy, E. Miller","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2003618","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2003618","url":null,"abstract":"The bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (“Lehman”) is the largest bankruptcy ever filed, with losses to investors, both small and large, totaling billions of dollars. In January 2008, Lehman Brothers, heavily invested in by pension plans such as the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the New York State Teachers Retirement Plan, traded at a high of over $65 per share. At that time, Lehman reported record numbers of nearly $60 billion in revenue and more than $4 billion in earnings. However, a mere eight months later, Lehman’s stock was trading under $4 per share, and on September 12, 2008, Lehman filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.The Bankruptcy Court appointed an Examiner to investigate and report on Lehman’s business affairs, with particular regard to “any fact ascertained pertaining to fraud, dishonesty, incompetence, misconduct, mismanagement, or irregularity in the management of the affairs of the debtor, or to a cause of action available to the estate.” The Examiner’s findings, taken at face value, reveal that the legal system that allowed Lehman’s failure will permit similar failures in the future because, for the most part, Lehman’s actions did not violate the law.This report explores Lehman’s risk management in a declining market and the valuation of its assets. Lehman, after recognizing the magnitude of the economic crisis, doubled-down on its risk, dramatically increasing the amount it was prepared to lose, while also disguising the declining value of its assets. These acts were not inadvertent, but rather were deliberate violations of internal risk limits and conscious overvaluations of its assets.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"152 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115079683","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Absolute Priority Rule and Option Theory 绝对优先原则与期权理论
Pub Date : 2011-09-19 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1930404
Bobby Huang
Using the language of options, this paper shows how variance in judicial valuation under an unbiased judge may work to the disadvantage of the junior class in Chapter 11 reorganizations. Given liquidity constraints and information barriers, the parties to bankruptcy cases choose Chapter 11 to propose plans to distribute securities of the reorganized debtor instead of cash. In this context, we identify three effects from the valuation variance - the floor, the ceiling, and the feasibility effects - two of which favor the senior class. Our analysis puts in doubt the conventional wisdom (Baird & Bernstein 2006) of a systematic bias of valuation variance in favor of the junior class in Chapter 11 reorganizations. The framework we offer may also enable us to further examine the efficiency of absolute priority.
本文运用期权的语言,展示了在公正法官的指导下,司法估价的差异如何在第11章重组中对初级阶级不利。鉴于流动性约束和信息障碍,破产案件当事人选择Chapter 11提出重组债务人的证券而非现金分配方案。在这种情况下,我们从估值方差中识别出三种效应——下限、上限和可行性效应——其中两种效应有利于高级管理层。我们的分析对传统观点(Baird & Bernstein 2006)提出了质疑,即在第11章重组中,估值差异存在系统性偏见,有利于初级阶层。我们提供的框架也可能使我们能够进一步审查绝对优先的效率。
{"title":"Absolute Priority Rule and Option Theory","authors":"Bobby Huang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1930404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1930404","url":null,"abstract":"Using the language of options, this paper shows how variance in judicial valuation under an unbiased judge may work to the disadvantage of the junior class in Chapter 11 reorganizations. Given liquidity constraints and information barriers, the parties to bankruptcy cases choose Chapter 11 to propose plans to distribute securities of the reorganized debtor instead of cash. In this context, we identify three effects from the valuation variance - the floor, the ceiling, and the feasibility effects - two of which favor the senior class. Our analysis puts in doubt the conventional wisdom (Baird & Bernstein 2006) of a systematic bias of valuation variance in favor of the junior class in Chapter 11 reorganizations. The framework we offer may also enable us to further examine the efficiency of absolute priority.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"83 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126042231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Human Worth as Collateral 作为抵押品的人类价值
Pub Date : 2006-10-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.939587
Rashmi Dyal-Chand
Human worth has taken on a surprising new role: that of market asset. Specifically, lenders in radically different contexts are using their borrowers' human worth as collateral in loan transactions. The two examples of this new collateralization that I examine are credit card lending in the United States and microlending programs in the Third World. I conclude that the use of human worth in these two contexts is too similar to be coincidental. Rather, this new collateralization is a product of globalization. For those interested in the effect of law on globalization, this convergence in the market for credit teaches important lessons. In both the contexts I examine, the laws governing secured and unsecured lending fail to recognize human worth as collateral. For this reason, the new collateralization serves as a counter-example to the claimed centrality of the rule of law in economic development.
人的价值承担了一个令人惊讶的新角色:市场资产。具体来说,在完全不同的背景下,贷款人在贷款交易中使用借款人的人性价值作为抵押品。我研究的两个新抵押的例子是美国的信用卡贷款和第三世界的小额贷款项目。我的结论是,在这两种情况下,人类价值的使用太相似了,不可能是巧合。相反,这种新的抵押是全球化的产物。对于那些对法律对全球化的影响感兴趣的人来说,信贷市场的这种趋同给他们上了重要的一课。在我研究的这两种情况下,管理有担保和无担保贷款的法律都没有承认人的价值是抵押品。出于这个原因,新的抵押作为一个反例,对所谓的法治在经济发展中的中心地位。
{"title":"Human Worth as Collateral","authors":"Rashmi Dyal-Chand","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.939587","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.939587","url":null,"abstract":"Human worth has taken on a surprising new role: that of market asset. Specifically, lenders in radically different contexts are using their borrowers' human worth as collateral in loan transactions. The two examples of this new collateralization that I examine are credit card lending in the United States and microlending programs in the Third World. I conclude that the use of human worth in these two contexts is too similar to be coincidental. Rather, this new collateralization is a product of globalization. For those interested in the effect of law on globalization, this convergence in the market for credit teaches important lessons. In both the contexts I examine, the laws governing secured and unsecured lending fail to recognize human worth as collateral. For this reason, the new collateralization serves as a counter-example to the claimed centrality of the rule of law in economic development.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"95 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116315812","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10
The Evolution of U.S. Insolvency Law for Financial Market Contracts 美国破产法在金融市场契约中的演变
Pub Date : 2006-06-13 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.916345
Michael H. Krimminger
The enactment of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 was the most significant change to the United States' insolvency laws for the financial markets in more than fifteen years. Unlike all prior laws defining how financial market contracts would be treated in bankruptcy or a bank insolvency, the new comprehensively updated and harmonized all of the principal laws that could come into play in insolvencies of market participants, including banks, thrifts, credit unions, broker-dealers, investment banks, and other companies. The 2005 Bankruptcy Reform Act, however, was not a new direction in American law. The special protections provided to termination and close-out netting for capital markets contracts in the new amendments simply continued an evolutionary process in American insolvency law that started with the enactment of the new Bankruptcy Code in 1978. Once the foundation for protection of the liquidity of financial market contracts had been established by 1991, American law provided the basis for effective risk management by market participants. The task of the past fifteen years has been to secure those benefits, clarify the interrelationships between different insolvency laws, and define the scope of flexibility to accommodate market developments. It must be recognized, however, that these protections are a departure from the pari pasu principle inherent in equitable insolvency laws. Nonetheless, this principle has never meant that all creditors should receive the same proportional share. Insolvency law has always recognized that creditors should be able to benefit from some characteristics of the bargain they made with the debtor before its failure. As illustrated in the article, the fundamental goal of those special protections is the prevention of the risks to the stability of the financial system that could result from a cascade of interrelated defaults if normal insolvency processes prevented termination and settlement of pending trades. As a result, there are limits to the further expansion of those protections if they are to remain consistent with the underlying public policy that supports them. This article examines the evolution of the special protections for financial market contracts under U.S. insolvency law (including the Bankruptcy Code and the Federal Deposit Insurance Act's protection for "qualified financial contracts") and the public policy goals underlying those protections, looks at the continuing course of that evolution in the Bankruptcy Reform Act, and provides an overview of what this evolution means for bank and non-bank insolvencies of financial market participants.
2005年《破产滥用预防和消费者保护法》的颁布是15年来美国破产法对金融市场最重大的变化。与以往所有规定金融市场合同在破产或银行资不抵债时如何处理的法律不同,新的法律全面更新和协调了所有可能在市场参与者(包括银行、储蓄机构、信用合作社、经纪交易商、投资银行和其他公司)破产中发挥作用的主要法律。然而,2005年的破产改革法案并不是美国法律的新方向。新修正案中对资本市场合同的终止和终止净收入提供的特殊保护只是延续了美国破产法的演变过程,该过程始于1978年颁布的新《破产法》。1991年,保护金融市场合约流动性的基础确立后,美国法律为市场参与者进行有效的风险管理提供了基础。过去15年的任务是确保这些利益,澄清不同破产法之间的相互关系,并确定灵活性的范围,以适应市场发展。但是,必须认识到,这些保护背离了衡平法中固有的同等权益原则。尽管如此,这一原则从未意味着所有债权人都应获得相同比例的份额。破产法一直承认,债权人应当能够从其在破产前与债务人达成的交易的某些特征中获益。如文中所述,这些特别保护的根本目标是防止金融体系稳定的风险,如果正常的破产程序阻止了未完成交易的终止和结算,那么一系列相互关联的违约可能会导致风险。因此,如果要使这些保护与支持它们的基本公共政策保持一致,那么进一步扩大这些保护就会受到限制。本文考察了美国破产法(包括《破产法》和《联邦存款保险法》对“合格金融合同”的保护)下对金融市场合同的特殊保护的演变,以及这些保护背后的公共政策目标,考察了《破产改革法》中这一演变的持续过程,并概述了这一演变对金融市场参与者的银行和非银行破产意味着什么。
{"title":"The Evolution of U.S. Insolvency Law for Financial Market Contracts","authors":"Michael H. Krimminger","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.916345","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.916345","url":null,"abstract":"The enactment of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 was the most significant change to the United States' insolvency laws for the financial markets in more than fifteen years. Unlike all prior laws defining how financial market contracts would be treated in bankruptcy or a bank insolvency, the new comprehensively updated and harmonized all of the principal laws that could come into play in insolvencies of market participants, including banks, thrifts, credit unions, broker-dealers, investment banks, and other companies. The 2005 Bankruptcy Reform Act, however, was not a new direction in American law. The special protections provided to termination and close-out netting for capital markets contracts in the new amendments simply continued an evolutionary process in American insolvency law that started with the enactment of the new Bankruptcy Code in 1978. Once the foundation for protection of the liquidity of financial market contracts had been established by 1991, American law provided the basis for effective risk management by market participants. The task of the past fifteen years has been to secure those benefits, clarify the interrelationships between different insolvency laws, and define the scope of flexibility to accommodate market developments. It must be recognized, however, that these protections are a departure from the pari pasu principle inherent in equitable insolvency laws. Nonetheless, this principle has never meant that all creditors should receive the same proportional share. Insolvency law has always recognized that creditors should be able to benefit from some characteristics of the bargain they made with the debtor before its failure. As illustrated in the article, the fundamental goal of those special protections is the prevention of the risks to the stability of the financial system that could result from a cascade of interrelated defaults if normal insolvency processes prevented termination and settlement of pending trades. As a result, there are limits to the further expansion of those protections if they are to remain consistent with the underlying public policy that supports them. This article examines the evolution of the special protections for financial market contracts under U.S. insolvency law (including the Bankruptcy Code and the Federal Deposit Insurance Act's protection for \"qualified financial contracts\") and the public policy goals underlying those protections, looks at the continuing course of that evolution in the Bankruptcy Reform Act, and provides an overview of what this evolution means for bank and non-bank insolvencies of financial market participants.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2006-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126340769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
Institutions, Incentives, and Consumer Bankruptcy Reform 制度、激励和消费者破产改革
Pub Date : 2005-03-08 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.681483
Todd J. Zywicki
Consumer bankruptcy filing rates have soared during the past 25 years. From 225,000 filings in 1979, consumer bankruptcies topped 1.5 million during 2004. This relentless upward trend is striking in light of the generally high prosperity, low interest rates, and low unemployment during that period. In response to this anomaly of ever-upward bankruptcy filing rates during a period of economic prosperity, Congress passed the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BAPCPA"), which fundamentally rebalances the consumer bankruptcy system by creating new safeguards against fraudulent and abusive filings. Although BAPCPA drew broad bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, it is controversial within the academy. Critics have argued that these reforms are unnecessary and punitive, and that private market adjustments such as higher interest rates and more restrictive credit rationing are adequate policy responses to the problem of rising bankruptcy filings without the need for legislative reform. These criticisms are misplaced, and fail to appreciate the causes of the consumer bankruptcy crisis and the appropriate responses to it. Scholars have previously identified two models of the consumer bankruptcy process, the "traditional" or distress model and the economic incentives model. Neither model, however, can explain the observed bankruptcy filing patterns of recent decades. This article offers a new model of consumer bankruptcy rooted in New Institutional Economics that explains the rise in consumer bankruptcy filings as reflecting changes in the institutions, incentives, and constraints surrounding the consumer bankruptcy filing decision. It is argued that this new model of consumer bankruptcy is both theoretically and empirically superior to the traditional model. The demise of the traditional model, which has dominated bankruptcy scholarship for a century, has created a need for a new theory of consumer bankruptcy filings that can better explain the observed data. The model offered here fills that gap. This article identifies three institutional factors that can explain the observed rise in bankruptcy filings over the past several decades: (1) A change in the relative economic costs and benefits associated with filing bankruptcy; (2) A change in social norms regarding bankruptcy; and (3) Changes in the nature of consumer credit, toward more national and impersonal forms of consumer credit. All of these factors have tended to increase the incentives and opportunity for filing bankruptcy or reduce the constraints imposed on filing bankruptcy. In contrast to the traditional distress model, which purports to focus on changes in underlying household financial condition as the cause of rising bankruptcies, this model presented here examines the economic demand for bankruptcy itself, focusing on the incentives and institutions that condition consumer bankruptcy filings. The result of all of these changes has been to increase the equilibri
在过去的25年里,消费者申请破产的比率飙升。消费者破产申请从1979年的22.5万件增至2004年的150万件。这一持续上升的趋势在这一时期普遍高度繁荣、低利率和低失业率的背景下是引人注目的。为了应对经济繁荣时期破产申请率不断上升的反常现象,国会通过了《2005年破产滥用预防和消费者保护法》(“BAPCPA”),该法案通过建立新的防止欺诈和滥用申请的保障措施,从根本上重新平衡了消费者破产制度。尽管BAPCPA在国会获得了广泛的两党支持,但在学院内部存在争议。批评人士认为,这些改革是不必要的,而且是惩罚性的,而私人市场的调整,如提高利率和更严格的信贷配给,是应对破产申请上升问题的适当政策,而不需要进行立法改革。这些批评是错误的,而且没有认识到消费者破产危机的原因以及对它的适当反应。学者们先前已经确定了消费者破产过程的两种模型,即“传统”或困境模型和经济激励模型。然而,这两个模型都不能解释近几十年来观察到的破产申请模式。本文提出了一个基于新制度经济学的消费者破产新模型,该模型解释了消费者破产申请的增加反映了围绕消费者破产申请决定的制度、激励和约束的变化。本文认为,这种新的消费者破产模型在理论和经验上都优于传统的消费者破产模型。一个世纪以来主导破产研究的传统模型的消亡,催生了对一种新的消费者破产申请理论的需求,这种理论可以更好地解释观察到的数据。这里提供的模型填补了这一空白。本文确定了三个制度因素,可以解释过去几十年来破产申请数量的上升:(1)与破产申请相关的相对经济成本和收益的变化;(2)破产社会规范的变化;(3)消费信贷性质的变化,趋向于更加国家化和非个人化的消费信贷形式。所有这些因素都倾向于增加申请破产的激励和机会,或减少对申请破产的限制。与传统的困境模型相反,传统的困境模型旨在关注潜在家庭财务状况的变化作为破产上升的原因,本文提出的这个模型考察了破产本身的经济需求,重点关注消费者破产申请的激励和制度。所有这些变化的结果是增加了美国破产申请的均衡水平。鉴于这些变化,本文简要讨论了接受这种新的消费者破产模式的一些政策含义。特别是,这里描述的模型解释了BAPCPA的经济逻辑,表明其关键条款与这里提出的新消费者破产模型的逻辑是一致的。此外,这篇文章还提出了更深远的建议,如努力扭转社会规范的变化,或建议允许围绕现行法律的强制排放条款订立合同。
{"title":"Institutions, Incentives, and Consumer Bankruptcy Reform","authors":"Todd J. Zywicki","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.681483","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.681483","url":null,"abstract":"Consumer bankruptcy filing rates have soared during the past 25 years. From 225,000 filings in 1979, consumer bankruptcies topped 1.5 million during 2004. This relentless upward trend is striking in light of the generally high prosperity, low interest rates, and low unemployment during that period. In response to this anomaly of ever-upward bankruptcy filing rates during a period of economic prosperity, Congress passed the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (\"BAPCPA\"), which fundamentally rebalances the consumer bankruptcy system by creating new safeguards against fraudulent and abusive filings. Although BAPCPA drew broad bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, it is controversial within the academy. Critics have argued that these reforms are unnecessary and punitive, and that private market adjustments such as higher interest rates and more restrictive credit rationing are adequate policy responses to the problem of rising bankruptcy filings without the need for legislative reform. These criticisms are misplaced, and fail to appreciate the causes of the consumer bankruptcy crisis and the appropriate responses to it. Scholars have previously identified two models of the consumer bankruptcy process, the \"traditional\" or distress model and the economic incentives model. Neither model, however, can explain the observed bankruptcy filing patterns of recent decades. This article offers a new model of consumer bankruptcy rooted in New Institutional Economics that explains the rise in consumer bankruptcy filings as reflecting changes in the institutions, incentives, and constraints surrounding the consumer bankruptcy filing decision. It is argued that this new model of consumer bankruptcy is both theoretically and empirically superior to the traditional model. The demise of the traditional model, which has dominated bankruptcy scholarship for a century, has created a need for a new theory of consumer bankruptcy filings that can better explain the observed data. The model offered here fills that gap. This article identifies three institutional factors that can explain the observed rise in bankruptcy filings over the past several decades: (1) A change in the relative economic costs and benefits associated with filing bankruptcy; (2) A change in social norms regarding bankruptcy; and (3) Changes in the nature of consumer credit, toward more national and impersonal forms of consumer credit. All of these factors have tended to increase the incentives and opportunity for filing bankruptcy or reduce the constraints imposed on filing bankruptcy. In contrast to the traditional distress model, which purports to focus on changes in underlying household financial condition as the cause of rising bankruptcies, this model presented here examines the economic demand for bankruptcy itself, focusing on the incentives and institutions that condition consumer bankruptcy filings. The result of all of these changes has been to increase the equilibri","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"178 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2005-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122987736","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24
Countermanding Payment of a Cheque 拒付支票
Pub Date : 2004-12-10 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2365685
C. Nagel, J. Pretorius
A legal obligation envisages performance and is extinguished when the required performance is duly made. Monetary obligations must normally be discharged by the payment of the appropriate sum of money, that is to say, by means of legal tender. It is trite that a cheque is not legal tender and that a creditor, to whom a money debt is owing, may insist on strict compliance with the contract and demand payment by means of legal tender, that is, cash. However, the creditor may agree to accept a cheque in payment of the debt. Indeed, it is a principle of our law that a debtor is only entitled to pay by cheque if his creditor expressly or impliedly agrees to accept a cheque in payment of the debt.
法定义务设想履行,并在要求履行的义务如期履行时消灭。货币债务通常必须通过支付适当数额的货币,也就是说,通过法定货币来履行。众所周知,支票不是法定货币,欠钱债的债权人可能会坚持严格遵守合同,要求用法定货币,即现金支付。但债权人得同意以支票支付债务。事实上,我国法律的一项原则是,债务人只有在其债权人明示或默示同意接受以支票支付债务的情况下,才有权以支票支付。
{"title":"Countermanding Payment of a Cheque","authors":"C. Nagel, J. Pretorius","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2365685","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2365685","url":null,"abstract":"A legal obligation envisages performance and is extinguished when the required performance is duly made. Monetary obligations must normally be discharged by the payment of the appropriate sum of money, that is to say, by means of legal tender. It is trite that a cheque is not legal tender and that a creditor, to whom a money debt is owing, may insist on strict compliance with the contract and demand payment by means of legal tender, that is, cash. However, the creditor may agree to accept a cheque in payment of the debt. Indeed, it is a principle of our law that a debtor is only entitled to pay by cheque if his creditor expressly or impliedly agrees to accept a cheque in payment of the debt.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2004-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115457539","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Fraud Management in the Credit Card Industry 信用卡行业的欺诈管理
Pub Date : 2002-04-01 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.927784
Peter Burns, A. Stanley
On November 16, 2001, the Payment Cards Center of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia sponsored a workshop on fraud management in the credit card industry. Daniel Buttafogo and Larry Drexler of Juniper Bank led the discussion. Daniel Buttafogo, Director-Risk Management, is Juniper's fraud expert. He provided an overview of fraud in the card industry and discussed some of the challenges he faces as a risk manager. ; Larry Drexler is General Counsel and the Chief Privacy Officer at Juniper. Following Buttafogo's remarks, he led a more general discussion on how fraud protection and security can be placed in the context of the broader public policy debate on information privacy. This paper summarizes these two executives' presentations and is supplemented by additional research.
2001年11月16日,费城联邦储备银行支付卡中心主办了一个关于信用卡行业欺诈管理的研讨会。Juniper银行的Daniel Buttafogo和Larry Drexler主持了讨论。风险管理总监Daniel Buttafogo是Juniper的欺诈专家。他概述了信用卡行业的欺诈行为,并讨论了他作为风险经理所面临的一些挑战。;拉里·德雷克斯勒(Larry Drexler)是瞻博网络的总法律顾问兼首席隐私官。在Buttafogo发表讲话之后,他领导了一场更广泛的讨论,讨论如何将欺诈保护和安全置于有关信息隐私的更广泛的公共政策辩论的背景下。本文总结了这两位高管的发言,并辅以进一步的研究。
{"title":"Fraud Management in the Credit Card Industry","authors":"Peter Burns, A. Stanley","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.927784","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.927784","url":null,"abstract":"On November 16, 2001, the Payment Cards Center of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia sponsored a workshop on fraud management in the credit card industry. Daniel Buttafogo and Larry Drexler of Juniper Bank led the discussion. Daniel Buttafogo, Director-Risk Management, is Juniper's fraud expert. He provided an overview of fraud in the card industry and discussed some of the challenges he faces as a risk manager. ; Larry Drexler is General Counsel and the Chief Privacy Officer at Juniper. Following Buttafogo's remarks, he led a more general discussion on how fraud protection and security can be placed in the context of the broader public policy debate on information privacy. This paper summarizes these two executives' presentations and is supplemented by additional research.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2002-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116241698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
Revised Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code: Implications for the Canadian Personal Property Security Acts 修订《统一商法典》第9条:对加拿大个人财产安全法的影响
Pub Date : 2001-02-15 DOI: 10.2139/SSRN.2732682
R. Cuming, C. Walsh
The Personal Property, Security, Acts" (PPSAs) in effect in the Canadian common law provinces have their intellectual roots in the 1972 version of Article 9 (Secured Trans- actions) of the Uniform Commercial Code in the United States. Article 9 has recently, undergone a complete revision. This article offers a comparative overview of the new regime. The authors begin by identifying those features of the new Article 9 for which analogous provision already is made in all or most of the PPSAs. They then analyze certain other new features, which they do not believe should be exported to a Canadian context. The most notable of these are the designation of the debtor's law as the universal choice of law rule for perfection (but not priority) of all security, interests, and the introduction of special perfection and priority rules for security interests in deposit accounts and sales of "payment intangibles." The authors then review a miscellany of other provisions of the new Article 9 which they believe do merit consideration for adaptation into the PPSAs, including an explicit provision for cross-collateralization in purchase money inventory financing. In their conclusion, the authors offer some more general observations on the overall style and policy implications of the new Article 9. They conclude that the increased emphasis on more detailed and specialized rules may paradoxically lead to greater uncertainty because of the increased complexity. More fundamentally, it puts into question the basic premise of both Article 9 and the PPSAs that the functional identity of all secured transactions demands an essentially unitary regulatory framework.
在加拿大普通法省份生效的《个人财产、安全、法案》(PPSAs)的知识根源在于1972年版的美国《统一商法典》第9条(担保交易)。最近对第9条进行了全面修订。这篇文章对新制度作了比较概述。作者首先确定了新的第9条的那些特点,而所有或大多数公共安全准则都已对这些特点作出了类似的规定。然后,他们分析了一些其他的新特征,他们认为这些特征不应该被导出到加拿大的环境中。其中最值得注意的是将债务人法指定为所有担保、权益的完善(但不是优先)的普遍法律选择规则,并对存款账户中的担保权益和“支付无形资产”的销售引入了特殊的完善和优先规则。然后,作者回顾了新的第9条的其他规定,他们认为这些规定值得考虑改编为ppsa,包括购买货币库存融资的交叉担保的明确规定。在结论中,作者对新的第9条的总体风格和政策含义提出了一些更笼统的看法。他们得出的结论是,由于复杂性的增加,对更详细和更专业的规则的强调可能矛盾地导致更大的不确定性。更根本的是,它对第9条和ppsa的基本前提提出了质疑,即所有担保交易的功能身份需要一个本质上统一的监管框架。
{"title":"Revised Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code: Implications for the Canadian Personal Property Security Acts","authors":"R. Cuming, C. Walsh","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2732682","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2732682","url":null,"abstract":"The Personal Property, Security, Acts\" (PPSAs) in effect in the Canadian common law provinces have their intellectual roots in the 1972 version of Article 9 (Secured Trans- actions) of the Uniform Commercial Code in the United States. Article 9 has recently, undergone a complete revision. This article offers a comparative overview of the new regime. The authors begin by identifying those features of the new Article 9 for which analogous provision already is made in all or most of the PPSAs. They then analyze certain other new features, which they do not believe should be exported to a Canadian context. The most notable of these are the designation of the debtor's law as the universal choice of law rule for perfection (but not priority) of all security, interests, and the introduction of special perfection and priority rules for security interests in deposit accounts and sales of \"payment intangibles.\" The authors then review a miscellany of other provisions of the new Article 9 which they believe do merit consideration for adaptation into the PPSAs, including an explicit provision for cross-collateralization in purchase money inventory financing. In their conclusion, the authors offer some more general observations on the overall style and policy implications of the new Article 9. They conclude that the increased emphasis on more detailed and specialized rules may paradoxically lead to greater uncertainty because of the increased complexity. More fundamentally, it puts into question the basic premise of both Article 9 and the PPSAs that the functional identity of all secured transactions demands an essentially unitary regulatory framework.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"214 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2001-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115510348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Desafíos del Covid-19 en materia de seguros (Challenges of the COVID-19 Regarding Insurance)
Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.18601/16923960.v19n1.03
Rafael Alberto Ariza Vesga
The covid-19 virus, commonly known as Coronavirus, and the measures taken by the Colombian Government to prevent its spread, have determined impacts in multiple areas of the national and international economy. The insurance activity has been equally impacted, not only from the point of view of development as an industry, but also due to the different claim hypotheses that may occur in the different insurance lines that may generate significant controversies. This article aims to show the most outstanding challenges that we find to date from the perspective of the insurance products and their conditions. However, we must recognize that there are still unsuspected new effects that will occur, according to the duration of the pandemic and the actions taken by different economic actors.
covid-19病毒,俗称冠状病毒,以及哥伦比亚政府为防止其传播而采取的措施,对国家和国际经济的多个领域产生了确定的影响。保险活动同样受到了影响,不仅从作为一个行业发展的角度来看,而且由于不同的保险项目可能出现不同的索赔假设,这可能会产生重大争议。本文旨在从保险产品及其条件的角度展示迄今为止我们发现的最突出的挑战。然而,我们必须认识到,根据大流行病的持续时间和不同经济行动者所采取的行动,仍然会出现意想不到的新影响。
{"title":"Desafíos del Covid-19 en materia de seguros (Challenges of the COVID-19 Regarding Insurance)","authors":"Rafael Alberto Ariza Vesga","doi":"10.18601/16923960.v19n1.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.18601/16923960.v19n1.03","url":null,"abstract":"The covid-19 virus, commonly known as Coronavirus, and the measures taken by the Colombian Government to prevent its spread, have determined impacts in multiple areas of the national and international economy. The insurance activity has been equally impacted, not only from the point of view of development as an industry, but also due to the different claim hypotheses that may occur in the different insurance lines that may generate significant controversies. This article aims to show the most outstanding challenges that we find to date from the perspective of the insurance products and their conditions. However, we must recognize that there are still unsuspected new effects that will occur, according to the duration of the pandemic and the actions taken by different economic actors.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123683182","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
금융그룹 계열사간 위험전이 방지를 위한 법제도 연구 (A Comparative Study on Legal Systems for Prevention of the Risk Contagion between Affiliates within Financial Conglomerates) (A Comparative Study on Legal Systems for Prevention of the Risk Contagion between Affiliates within Financial Conglomerates)
Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.3018356
Joengwoong Baik
Korean Abstract: 1997년말 외환위기로 기업이 구조조정되면서 은행도 퇴출되는 것을 목격한 바 있고, 여기에 소요된 비용으로서 천문학적인 공적자금이 투여되었으나 그 회수에는 많은 어려움이 있는 것이 지금의 현실이다. 여기서 한 걸음 더 나아가 만약 은행 등 금융기관을 자회사로 둔 거대금융그룹인 금융지주회사가 파산한다면 그 부작용은 우리 경제에는 치명적일 것으로 생각된다. 따라서 이와 같은 거대금융그룹이 건전하고 안전하게 운영될 수 있는 방법의 모색으로 미국의 법인격부인론과 상호보증 및 힘의 원천이론을 고찰한 결론은 다음과 같다. 첫째 미국에서는 법인격부인론과 상호보증 및 힘의 원천이론의 적용에 대하여 법원과 학자들에 의하여 일반적으로 지지를 받고 있다는 것이다. 둘째 이와 같은 미국의 법인격부인론과 상호보증 및 힘의 원천이론을 우리법제에서 재점검한 바에 의하여도 여전히 적용하는 데에는 법리상 무리가 없다는 것이다. 끝으로 법인격부인론과 상호보증 및 힘의 원천이론이 우리법제에도 유용한 수단이라고 하더라도 이들 제도를 도입 또는 보완하기 위하여 법률의 제정 또는 개정작업 등 법제적인 정비작업이 수반되어야 것이다. 이를 통하여 거대금융그룹인 금융지주회사가 안전하고 건전하게 운영되어 해당 금융그룹도 발전하고 국가경제발전에도 일조하기를 기대해 본다. English Abstract: Recently many financial institutions are trying to convert their organizations into financial conglomerates through the financial holding company system in order to improve their competitiveness. However, there occur some side effects such as risk contagions between subsidiaries in financial conglomerates. Even though there are the economies of scale and scope in the financial conglomerates, the risk contagion must be prevented. In order to remove or decrease such a risk contagion under financial conglomerates, the article introduces three tools, such as the corporate veil piercing doctrine(hereinafter CVPD), the cross-guarantee provision(hereinafter CGP) and the source of strength doctrine (hereinafter SSD), reviews them critically and suggests some concluding observations as follows: First, the courts have successfully applied the CVPD, CGP and SSD to the United States and their applications have also been supported by many legal scholars. Second, such lessons from the United States can be also suitable for he Korea legal system by reexamining such tools in Korea. Third, even if such tools are suitable for Korea, some legislation or amendment is needed to be followed as adoption or modification of such tools.
Korean Abstract: 1997年末因外汇危机,企业进行结构调整,银行也被退出,为此所需的费用虽然投入了天文数字的公共资金,但是在回收上存在很多困难,这就是现在的现实。在此基础上,如果拥有银行等金融机构子公司的巨大金融集团——金融控股公司破产,其副作用将对韩国经济造成致命打击。因此,作为这种巨大金融集团健康安全运营的方法的探索,对美国的法人人格否认论和相互保证及力量源泉理论进行考察的结论如下。第一,在美国,法人格否认论和相互保证以及力量源泉理论的应用普遍得到法院和学者的支持。第二,我国法制重新检查了美国的法人人格否认论和相互保证及力量源泉理论,因此在法理上仍然适用没有问题。最后,虽然法人人格否认论和相互保证及力量源泉理论对我国法制也是有用的手段,但为了引进或完善这些制度,应该同时进行法律的制定或修改等法制整顿工作。希望通过此举,巨大的金融集团——金融控股公司能够安全、健康地运营,相关金融集团也能得到发展,为国家经济发展做出贡献。english abstract:Recently many financial institutions are trying to convert their organizations into financial conglomerates through the financial holding company system in order to improve their competitiveness。However, there occur some side effects such as risk contagions between subsidiaries in financial conglomerates。Even though there are the economies of scale and scope in the financial conglomerates, the risk contagion must be prevented。In order to remove or decrease such a risk contagion under financial conglomerates, the article introduces three tools, such as the corporate veil piercing doctrine(hereinafter CVPD)the cross-guarantee provision(hereinafter CGP) and the source of strength doctrine (hereinafter SSD), reviews them critically and suggests some concluding observations as follows:First, the courts have successfully applied the CVPD, CGP and SSD to the United States and their applications have also been supported by many legal scholars。such lessons from the United States can be also suitable for he Korea legal system by reexamining such tools in KoreaThird, even if such tools are suitable for Korea, some legislation or amendment is needed to be followed as adoption or modification of such tools。
{"title":"금융그룹 계열사간 위험전이 방지를 위한 법제도 연구 (A Comparative Study on Legal Systems for Prevention of the Risk Contagion between Affiliates within Financial Conglomerates)","authors":"Joengwoong Baik","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3018356","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3018356","url":null,"abstract":"Korean Abstract: 1997년말 외환위기로 기업이 구조조정되면서 은행도 퇴출되는 것을 목격한 바 있고, 여기에 소요된 비용으로서 천문학적인 공적자금이 투여되었으나 그 회수에는 많은 어려움이 있는 것이 지금의 현실이다. 여기서 한 걸음 더 나아가 만약 은행 등 금융기관을 자회사로 둔 거대금융그룹인 금융지주회사가 파산한다면 그 부작용은 우리 경제에는 치명적일 것으로 생각된다. 따라서 이와 같은 거대금융그룹이 건전하고 안전하게 운영될 수 있는 방법의 모색으로 미국의 법인격부인론과 상호보증 및 힘의 원천이론을 고찰한 결론은 다음과 같다. 첫째 미국에서는 법인격부인론과 상호보증 및 힘의 원천이론의 적용에 대하여 법원과 학자들에 의하여 일반적으로 지지를 받고 있다는 것이다. 둘째 이와 같은 미국의 법인격부인론과 상호보증 및 힘의 원천이론을 우리법제에서 재점검한 바에 의하여도 여전히 적용하는 데에는 법리상 무리가 없다는 것이다. 끝으로 법인격부인론과 상호보증 및 힘의 원천이론이 우리법제에도 유용한 수단이라고 하더라도 이들 제도를 도입 또는 보완하기 위하여 법률의 제정 또는 개정작업 등 법제적인 정비작업이 수반되어야 것이다. 이를 통하여 거대금융그룹인 금융지주회사가 안전하고 건전하게 운영되어 해당 금융그룹도 발전하고 국가경제발전에도 일조하기를 기대해 본다. \u0000 \u0000English Abstract: Recently many financial institutions are trying to convert their organizations into financial conglomerates through the financial holding company system in order to improve their competitiveness. However, there occur some side effects such as risk contagions between subsidiaries in financial conglomerates. Even though there are the economies of scale and scope in the financial conglomerates, the risk contagion must be prevented. In order to remove or decrease such a risk contagion under financial conglomerates, the article introduces three tools, such as the corporate veil piercing doctrine(hereinafter CVPD), the cross-guarantee provision(hereinafter CGP) and the source of strength doctrine (hereinafter SSD), reviews them critically and suggests some concluding observations as follows: First, the courts have successfully applied the CVPD, CGP and SSD to the United States and their applications have also been supported by many legal scholars. Second, such lessons from the United States can be also suitable for he Korea legal system by reexamining such tools in Korea. Third, even if such tools are suitable for Korea, some legislation or amendment is needed to be followed as adoption or modification of such tools.","PeriodicalId":137765,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130378126","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Law & Society: Private Law - Financial Law eJournal
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1