Getting to yes: the role of coercion in debt renegotiations

IF 1.8 1区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Vincent S J Buccola, Marcel Kahan
{"title":"Getting to yes: the role of coercion in debt renegotiations","authors":"Vincent S J Buccola, Marcel Kahan","doi":"10.1093/jla/laaf009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article develops a comprehensive account of the methods of consent solicitation broadly construed. We offer four principal contributions. First, we identify the features of a solicitation that can produce coercive intercreditor dynamics. Second, we document the possibility of coercive methods under standard bond and loan contracts. Third, we show that economic considerations can justify coercion. Fourth, we conclude that the most coercive prevailing techniques cannot be so easily justified and propose an approach to construing debt contracts that would restrain what are likely the most value-destructive solicitation methods without condemning longstanding and plausibly value-enhancing techniques.","PeriodicalId":45189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Analysis","volume":"194 1","pages":"166-189"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jla/laaf009","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article develops a comprehensive account of the methods of consent solicitation broadly construed. We offer four principal contributions. First, we identify the features of a solicitation that can produce coercive intercreditor dynamics. Second, we document the possibility of coercive methods under standard bond and loan contracts. Third, we show that economic considerations can justify coercion. Fourth, we conclude that the most coercive prevailing techniques cannot be so easily justified and propose an approach to construing debt contracts that would restrain what are likely the most value-destructive solicitation methods without condemning longstanding and plausibly value-enhancing techniques.
同意:强制在债务重新谈判中的作用
本文从广义上阐述了征求同意的方法。我们提供四种主要贡献。首先,我们确定了可以产生强制债权人间动态的恳求的特征。其次,我们记录了在标准债券和贷款合同下强制方法的可能性。第三,我们表明经济考虑可以证明强制是正当的。第四,我们得出的结论是,最具强制性的主流技术不可能如此容易地被证明是合理的,并提出了一种构建债务合同的方法,该方法将限制可能最具价值破坏性的恳求方法,而不会谴责长期存在且看似提高价值的技术。
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信