a ) common characteristics b) any significant differences In any case: c) how compatible are those processes d) how would the event of any incompatability affect the development and employment of a cross border recognition and assistance law between those jurisdictions
Within the more advanced legal systems when the latter deals with insolvency and bankruptcy, one usually finds a mechanism which would come in force given certain predetermined circumstances. This mechanism has the scope of actually attempting to minimise the various not so desirable effects, both on the individuals concerned as well as on the business units involved, which a situation of insolvency brings about. It can be said to be a recognition of the fact that a situation of insolvency not only effects the person or company who or which is going through a process of bankruptcy but ultimately effects also the economy as a whole. In fact the amount of bankruptcies currently being undergone within a country is usually taken as an indication of how well that particular economy is faring.
In the UK a review Group within the Department of Trade and Industry and HM Treasury opined that the trend seems to favour furthering the rescue culture. Whenever possible emphasis should be laid on the assisting of companies in order that the latter might be placed in a position to as much as possible overcome what may in the ultimate analysis be temporary financial difficulties. It is submitted that in these types of situations, the problem is to assess exactly how temporary is temporary and numerous instances occour when what started off as being temporary resulted in the end of being permanent. In that report the emphasis seemed to be placed on the possible avoidance of liquidation and towards the furthering of a culture of a predisposition towards the preservation of a business unit as a going concern1.
Before the coming into force of the 1986 Insolvency Act in the UK, there were three kinds of liquidation procedures, namely members, creditors= and compulsory when the company was insolvent. An alternative rescue mechanism was put in place through the coming into force of The Insolvency Act 1986 called the Voluntary Arrangement procedure. This enabled the companies to enter into a contract with their creditors for the latter to be pay less than their full debts, however it was not so much utilised as it did not allow for the agreeing of a moratorium. The Insolvency Act 2000 introduces a new CVA procedure that includes a moratorium although it should perhaps be mentioned that the new CVA moratorium procedure is only available to companies that satisfy two or more of the requirements for being a small company, as set out in the Companies Act 1985.
Another remedy which may be classified as a non-insolvency remedy available to companies is a Scheme of Arrangement under Section 425 of the Companies Act 1985. Such schemes can be complex and have proved to be somewhat difficult to organise. Experience has shown that because of the expense and perhaps other reasons this remedy seems to be used primarily by the larger companies.
Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA) can be said to be the personal insolvency equivalent of a CVA. In contrast to CVAs, the Insolvency Act 1986 provided a moratorium for those seeking an IVA. However, the Insolvency Act 2000 introduces a simplified procedure for non-traders (i.e. consumer debt cases). In the case the Courts may ...
Cite this document
(“Cross Border Insolvency Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words”, n.d.)
Retrieved from https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/281621-cross-border-insolvency
(Cross Border Insolvency Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 Words)
“Cross Border Insolvency Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 Words”, n.d. https://studentshare.net/miscellaneous/281621-cross-border-insolvency.
Consequently, it is not impossible, theoretically, for a bank to have a charge over the cash deposited by one of its customers and which functions as the security with regard to a loan provided to the customer. This effectively discounted the Court of Appeal’s conceptual impossibility contention that had been supported by it.
With the overhaul of Chinese law and regulations affecting trade and business, many state-owned enterprises have consolidated and turned their attention to acquisition activities or have themselves become targets of acquisition by foreign investors. Large number of foreign owned business and joint ventures with foreign investors find it difficult to understand the regulatory system governing foreign investment and business in China which differs in many ways from its western counterparts.
Research illustrates that harmonization does not entail adoption of single set of rules, but instead implies wide range of ways in which differences in legal concepts in different jurisdictions are accommodated 1. Harmonization controls the condition of conducting trade according to familial rules of domestic international trade law.
Finance and Accounting
The need of accounting standards evolved because auditors and financial analyst were generally confronted with problems of accounting like misinterpretation, biasness, ambiguity and inaccuracy. To reduce these kinds of accounting errors, a set of accounting standards was developed, which was universally recognized.
The aim unlike other regulations is to not to protect the consumer, but to let the creditor to maximize the collective returns to credit. In most circumstances regime shopping within the EU is frowned upon, because there needs to be equality and protection for the both parties under the law; however with insolvency law this does not seems to be the case in cross border insolvency cases, especially with the definition of the centre of the debtor's main interest (COMI).
However, using cross border investment as a diversification tool does not only come with substantial opportunities and enhanced returns for the investors. There happen to be several issues associated with adding foreign financial and non financial assets to a portfolio.
It embodies the substance of the recommendation that a suitably modernized version of section 122 should be enacted, applicable to corporate as well as to individual insolvency, to provide for reciprocal enlargement of the power to give international assistance, particularly within the Commonwealth.
arious connotations, but it has been loosely defined as “development of global financial market, the growth of transnational corporation and their increasing domination over national economies.”1 Under these two phenomena ‘globalization’ and the opening of ‘global