寻找破产论坛:利用数字论坛改善破产程序中的正当程序,同时保持速度、确定性、自由裁量权和成本考虑

IF 0.6 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW American Bankruptcy Law Journal Pub Date : 2015-07-10 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2657473
Charles E. Rainey
{"title":"寻找破产论坛:利用数字论坛改善破产程序中的正当程序,同时保持速度、确定性、自由裁量权和成本考虑","authors":"Charles E. Rainey","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2657473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The recently enacted Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act of 2015 makes sweeping changes to the insolvency framework of the United Kingdom, supplanting much of the 1986 Insolvency Act, which had already undergone substantial amendment since its original passage. These changes illustrate a broader trend in U.K. insolvency practice – a movement away from formal processes in favour of streamlined, more flexible solutions for insolvent companies. We are faced with two, distinct and competing policy interests. On one hand, we want to increase certainty, minimize cost, and reach a resolution quickly and discreetly. However, on the other hand, we want a process that affords stakeholders the ability to reasonably voice their concerns and addresses those concerns in a manner that fairly and equitably resolves, or at least mitigates, disputes. However, this paper argues that, by utilising readily available technologies, we can create a digital forum for insolvency practice where all stakeholders can readily voice their opinions and reasonably resolve their disputes, while not only preserving, but, in fact, improving the efficiency, cost-effectiveness and certainty of the process. We may no longer need to sacrifice due process for efficiency.","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Finding a Forum for Insolvency: Using Digital Forums to Improve Due Process in Insolvency Proceedings While Preserving Speed, Certainty, Discretion, and Cost Considerations\",\"authors\":\"Charles E. Rainey\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2657473\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The recently enacted Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act of 2015 makes sweeping changes to the insolvency framework of the United Kingdom, supplanting much of the 1986 Insolvency Act, which had already undergone substantial amendment since its original passage. These changes illustrate a broader trend in U.K. insolvency practice – a movement away from formal processes in favour of streamlined, more flexible solutions for insolvent companies. We are faced with two, distinct and competing policy interests. On one hand, we want to increase certainty, minimize cost, and reach a resolution quickly and discreetly. However, on the other hand, we want a process that affords stakeholders the ability to reasonably voice their concerns and addresses those concerns in a manner that fairly and equitably resolves, or at least mitigates, disputes. However, this paper argues that, by utilising readily available technologies, we can create a digital forum for insolvency practice where all stakeholders can readily voice their opinions and reasonably resolve their disputes, while not only preserving, but, in fact, improving the efficiency, cost-effectiveness and certainty of the process. We may no longer need to sacrifice due process for efficiency.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44862,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Bankruptcy Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Bankruptcy Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2657473\",\"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.2657473","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: 0

摘要

最近颁布的2015年《小企业、企业和就业法》对联合王国的破产框架进行了全面改革,取代了1986年《破产法》的大部分内容,后者自最初通过以来已经进行了实质性修订。这些变化说明了英国破产实践的一个更广泛的趋势——从正式程序转向对破产公司采用精简、更灵活的解决方案。我们面临着两种截然不同、相互竞争的政策利益。一方面,我们希望增加确定性,最小化成本,并迅速而谨慎地达成解决方案。然而,另一方面,我们需要一个过程,使利益相关者能够合理地表达他们的关注,并以公平和公正的方式解决这些关注,或者至少减轻争议。然而,本文认为,通过利用现成的技术,我们可以为破产实践创建一个数字论坛,所有利益相关者都可以随时发表意见并合理地解决他们的争议,同时不仅保留,而且实际上提高了流程的效率、成本效益和确定性。我们可能不再需要为了效率而牺牲正当程序。
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
Finding a Forum for Insolvency: Using Digital Forums to Improve Due Process in Insolvency Proceedings While Preserving Speed, Certainty, Discretion, and Cost Considerations
The recently enacted Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Act of 2015 makes sweeping changes to the insolvency framework of the United Kingdom, supplanting much of the 1986 Insolvency Act, which had already undergone substantial amendment since its original passage. These changes illustrate a broader trend in U.K. insolvency practice – a movement away from formal processes in favour of streamlined, more flexible solutions for insolvent companies. We are faced with two, distinct and competing policy interests. On one hand, we want to increase certainty, minimize cost, and reach a resolution quickly and discreetly. However, on the other hand, we want a process that affords stakeholders the ability to reasonably voice their concerns and addresses those concerns in a manner that fairly and equitably resolves, or at least mitigates, disputes. However, this paper argues that, by utilising readily available technologies, we can create a digital forum for insolvency practice where all stakeholders can readily voice their opinions and reasonably resolve their disputes, while not only preserving, but, in fact, improving the efficiency, cost-effectiveness and certainty of the process. We may no longer need to sacrifice due process for efficiency.
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