国际企业集团破产案件的协调:建议

IF 0.6 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW American Bankruptcy Law Journal Pub Date : 2014-01-20 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.2382123
Samuel L. Bufford
{"title":"国际企业集团破产案件的协调:建议","authors":"Samuel L. Bufford","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2382123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The most important unsolved problem for international insolvency law is the treatment of enterprise groups or groups of companies. The principal structures for the coordination of trans-border insolvency cases are the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (1996) and the European Union Council Regulation 1346/2000, Insolvency Proceedings, both are drafted on the assumption that international enterprises doing business or otherwise involved in more than one country are single legal entities, whereas virtually every such enterprise is a group of legal entities. Both UNCITRAL and the European Union are presently working on solutions to this problem. This article proposes a solution to this problem through the creation of an international insolvency case for the enterprise group, which would serve as an umbrella for the insolvency cases of each constituent. The umbrella case would be commenced in the country where the group’s ECOMI (enterprise center of main interests) is located: the ECOMI concept is built on the COMI (center of main interests) concept in the existing international insolvency regimes. The country where the ECOMI case is commenced would then have jurisdiction for the main insolvency proceedings for each of the insolvency cases of the constituent entities – in contrast to the existing regime that requires that the main proceeding for each entity be commenced in the country where its own COMI is located. The article proposes solutions to numerous theoretical difficulties with this proposal, including the extent to which the law of the registered office, instead of the default rule of the law of the forum) should apply to the insolvency cases for each of the entities; forum shopping; the appointment of common professionals (office holders); the expanded use of secondary proceedings in the countries where the respective COMIs are located; providing explicitly for expanded coordination and communication obligations with respect to all of the members of the enterprise group with pending insolvency cases. The article contrasts this proposal with substantive consolidation, which is controversial and should be restricted to limited circumstances. Finally, the article explores the impact of this proposal on the long-standing controversy between the universalism and territorialism approaches to international insolvency law.","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"86 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.2382123","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coordination of Insolvency Cases for International Enterprise Groups: A Proposal\",\"authors\":\"Samuel L. Bufford\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2382123\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The most important unsolved problem for international insolvency law is the treatment of enterprise groups or groups of companies. The principal structures for the coordination of trans-border insolvency cases are the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (1996) and the European Union Council Regulation 1346/2000, Insolvency Proceedings, both are drafted on the assumption that international enterprises doing business or otherwise involved in more than one country are single legal entities, whereas virtually every such enterprise is a group of legal entities. Both UNCITRAL and the European Union are presently working on solutions to this problem. This article proposes a solution to this problem through the creation of an international insolvency case for the enterprise group, which would serve as an umbrella for the insolvency cases of each constituent. The umbrella case would be commenced in the country where the group’s ECOMI (enterprise center of main interests) is located: the ECOMI concept is built on the COMI (center of main interests) concept in the existing international insolvency regimes. The country where the ECOMI case is commenced would then have jurisdiction for the main insolvency proceedings for each of the insolvency cases of the constituent entities – in contrast to the existing regime that requires that the main proceeding for each entity be commenced in the country where its own COMI is located. The article proposes solutions to numerous theoretical difficulties with this proposal, including the extent to which the law of the registered office, instead of the default rule of the law of the forum) should apply to the insolvency cases for each of the entities; forum shopping; the appointment of common professionals (office holders); the expanded use of secondary proceedings in the countries where the respective COMIs are located; providing explicitly for expanded coordination and communication obligations with respect to all of the members of the enterprise group with pending insolvency cases. The article contrasts this proposal with substantive consolidation, which is controversial and should be restricted to limited circumstances. Finally, the article explores the impact of this proposal on the long-standing controversy between the universalism and territorialism approaches to international insolvency law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Bankruptcy Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"86 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-01-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.2382123\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Bankruptcy Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2382123\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2382123","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

国际破产法尚未解决的最重要问题是对企业集团或公司集团的处理。协调跨国界破产案件的主要结构是《贸易法委员会跨国界破产示范法》(1996年)和《欧洲联盟理事会第1346/2000号破产程序条例》,这两项条例的起草都假定在一个以上国家开展业务或以其他方式涉及的国际企业是单一的法律实体,而实际上每一个这样的企业都是一组法律实体。贸易法委员会和欧洲联盟目前都在努力解决这一问题。本文建议通过为企业集团创建一个国际破产案例来解决这一问题,该案例将作为每个组成部分破产案例的保护伞。综合案例将在集团的主要利益企业中心(ECOMI)所在的国家开始:ECOMI概念是以现有国际破产制度中的主要利益中心(COMI)概念为基础的。然后,经社理事会案件开始审理的国家将对组成实体的每个破产案件的主要破产程序拥有管辖权,而现行制度要求每个实体的主要破产程序必须在其本身的经社理事会所在的国家开始审理。本文提出了解决这一建议的许多理论困难的办法,包括在何种程度上注册办事处的法律(而不是法院法律的默认规则)应适用于每个实体的破产案件;论坛购物;一般专业人员(公职人员)的任命;在各自comi所在的国家扩大二级诉讼程序的使用;明确规定扩大对有未决破产案件的企业集团所有成员的协调和沟通义务。文章将这一建议与实质性合并进行了对比,后者是有争议的,应该限制在有限的情况下。最后,本文探讨了这一建议对国际破产法中普遍主义和地域主义方法之间长期存在的争议的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Coordination of Insolvency Cases for International Enterprise Groups: A Proposal
The most important unsolved problem for international insolvency law is the treatment of enterprise groups or groups of companies. The principal structures for the coordination of trans-border insolvency cases are the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (1996) and the European Union Council Regulation 1346/2000, Insolvency Proceedings, both are drafted on the assumption that international enterprises doing business or otherwise involved in more than one country are single legal entities, whereas virtually every such enterprise is a group of legal entities. Both UNCITRAL and the European Union are presently working on solutions to this problem. This article proposes a solution to this problem through the creation of an international insolvency case for the enterprise group, which would serve as an umbrella for the insolvency cases of each constituent. The umbrella case would be commenced in the country where the group’s ECOMI (enterprise center of main interests) is located: the ECOMI concept is built on the COMI (center of main interests) concept in the existing international insolvency regimes. The country where the ECOMI case is commenced would then have jurisdiction for the main insolvency proceedings for each of the insolvency cases of the constituent entities – in contrast to the existing regime that requires that the main proceeding for each entity be commenced in the country where its own COMI is located. The article proposes solutions to numerous theoretical difficulties with this proposal, including the extent to which the law of the registered office, instead of the default rule of the law of the forum) should apply to the insolvency cases for each of the entities; forum shopping; the appointment of common professionals (office holders); the expanded use of secondary proceedings in the countries where the respective COMIs are located; providing explicitly for expanded coordination and communication obligations with respect to all of the members of the enterprise group with pending insolvency cases. The article contrasts this proposal with substantive consolidation, which is controversial and should be restricted to limited circumstances. Finally, the article explores the impact of this proposal on the long-standing controversy between the universalism and territorialism approaches to international insolvency law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊最新文献
Steering Loan Modifications Post-Pandemic Passing the Parcel? Relationship Banking at the Onset of Financial Distress Treatment of Disputed Claims in Corporate Insolvency: Evolving Jurisprudence Paper Series VII - Arrangements and Compromise Government Activism in Bankruptcy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
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
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
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
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