Best Practices in European Restructuring - Contractualised Distress Resolution in the Shadow of the Law

Lorenzo Stanghellini, R. Mokal, C. Paulus, Ignacio Tirado
{"title":"Best Practices in European Restructuring - Contractualised Distress Resolution in the Shadow of the Law","authors":"Lorenzo Stanghellini, R. Mokal, C. Paulus, Ignacio Tirado","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3271790","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The general trend away from traditional, formal insolvency proceedings opens up a vast area to private ordering, with all the associated opportunities and risks. The transition can be less costly if the resulting uncertainty is reduced to a minimum. This presents national legislators with a delicate challenge. They should not be overly prescriptive and should effectively delegate decision-making to stakeholders and expert professionals, who are likely to be better informed and better incentivised. At the same time, the law must provide for information to flow where needed and for the creation of optimal incentives. \nAgainst this background, guidance on best practices can be of great value. It may assist policymaking in one jurisdiction by drawing attention to successes and failures in others, and it may allow professionals, advisors, debtors, creditors and courts to find common ground in the formulation of high-quality distress resolution plans and in distinguishing viable and non-viable distressed debtors. \nBased on extensive empirical research in four European Union states, this book takes up the challenge of unearthing and crystallising some of the most critical best practices in the various stages of a distress resolution process. Drawing on these best practices, it provides lawmakers with several ‘Policy Recommendations’, and other key stakeholders with a set of ‘Guidelines’. \nOf particular interest will be development of a relative priority rule (recently recommended by the European Council for incorporation in the draft directive on preventive restructuring); and discussion of the utility of a duty to file versus one to avoid wrongful trading; crisis events and early warning indicators; fairness in plan formulation, voting, examination, and confirmation; class formation and ‘cram-down’ issues; the goals, contents, and structure of high-quality plans; the role of professional advisors; negotiation best practices; the impact of prudential rules on NPLs on banks’ behaviour in corporate workouts; and plan implementation and monitoring. Special attention is given to the particular needs of micro, small, and medium enterprises.","PeriodicalId":210701,"journal":{"name":"Decision-Making in Public Policy & the Social Good eJournal","volume":"37 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decision-Making in Public Policy & the Social Good eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3271790","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

The general trend away from traditional, formal insolvency proceedings opens up a vast area to private ordering, with all the associated opportunities and risks. The transition can be less costly if the resulting uncertainty is reduced to a minimum. This presents national legislators with a delicate challenge. They should not be overly prescriptive and should effectively delegate decision-making to stakeholders and expert professionals, who are likely to be better informed and better incentivised. At the same time, the law must provide for information to flow where needed and for the creation of optimal incentives. Against this background, guidance on best practices can be of great value. It may assist policymaking in one jurisdiction by drawing attention to successes and failures in others, and it may allow professionals, advisors, debtors, creditors and courts to find common ground in the formulation of high-quality distress resolution plans and in distinguishing viable and non-viable distressed debtors. Based on extensive empirical research in four European Union states, this book takes up the challenge of unearthing and crystallising some of the most critical best practices in the various stages of a distress resolution process. Drawing on these best practices, it provides lawmakers with several ‘Policy Recommendations’, and other key stakeholders with a set of ‘Guidelines’. Of particular interest will be development of a relative priority rule (recently recommended by the European Council for incorporation in the draft directive on preventive restructuring); and discussion of the utility of a duty to file versus one to avoid wrongful trading; crisis events and early warning indicators; fairness in plan formulation, voting, examination, and confirmation; class formation and ‘cram-down’ issues; the goals, contents, and structure of high-quality plans; the role of professional advisors; negotiation best practices; the impact of prudential rules on NPLs on banks’ behaviour in corporate workouts; and plan implementation and monitoring. Special attention is given to the particular needs of micro, small, and medium enterprises.
欧洲重组的最佳实践-法律阴影下契约化的危机解决
传统的、正式的破产程序逐渐消失的大趋势,为私人命令开辟了广阔的领域,带来了所有相关的机会和风险。如果由此产生的不确定性减少到最低限度,则转换的成本可以降低。这给国家立法者提出了一个微妙的挑战。它们不应过于规范,而应有效地将决策授权给利益相关者和专业人士,因为他们可能更了解情况,也更有动力。与此同时,法律必须规定信息在需要的地方流通,并制定最佳的奖励办法。在这种背景下,关于最佳实践的指导可能非常有价值。它可以通过提请注意其他司法管辖区的成功和失败来协助一个司法管辖区的决策,它可以使专业人员、顾问、债务人、债权人和法院在制定高质量的解决困境计划和区分可行和不可行的陷入困境的债务人方面找到共同点。基于对四个欧盟国家的广泛实证研究,本书提出了在解决困境过程的各个阶段挖掘和具体化一些最关键的最佳实践的挑战。根据这些最佳做法,它向立法者提供了几项“政策建议”,并向其他主要利益攸关方提供了一套“指导方针”。特别令人感兴趣的将是制定一项相对优先的规则(欧洲理事会最近建议将其纳入关于预防性改组的指令草案);讨论了申报义务与避免不当交易义务的效用;危机事件和预警指标;方案制定、表决、审查、确认的公正性;阶级形成和“压制”问题;高质量规划的目标、内容和结构;专业顾问的作用;谈判最佳做法;不良贷款审慎规则对银行在企业重组中的行为的影响;以及计划的实施和监控。特别注意微型、小型和中型企业的特殊需要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信