请承认我:联合王国应颁布《联合国承认和执行破产判决示范法》

J. Churchill
{"title":"请承认我:联合王国应颁布《联合国承认和执行破产判决示范法》","authors":"J. Churchill","doi":"10.18356/7e1c6ff4-en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since 1995, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), has been developing tools to meet the challenges of having different insolvency laws managing a single cross-border insolvency. By 1997, UNCITRAL’s Working Group V completed the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. By September 2020, the original model law has been adopted by 48 countries. In Rubin v. Eurofinance SA, the U.K. Supreme Court cited a lack of authority to recognize a U.S. insolvency-related judgment in the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. As a result of this decision, UNCITRAL’s Working Group V developed the Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments.<br><br>This Note intends to address this following question: does this second model law provide a statutory basis to reverse the case law established by Rubin in the U.K.? This Note will demonstrate through an analysis of this new model law that a full implementation could potentially, but not definitely, provide such a basis. There is a small risk that a judge rejecting modified-universalism will not apply the new model law as designed to fix Rubin. Further, this Note will provide suggestions on where the new model law needs further direction or clarification to bring the U.K. and other relevant jurisdictions in line with the modified-universalist approach that UNCITRAL is targeting.<br>","PeriodicalId":199167,"journal":{"name":"English Law: International (Topic)","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Please Recognize Me: The United Kingdom Should Enact the Uncitral Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments\",\"authors\":\"J. Churchill\",\"doi\":\"10.18356/7e1c6ff4-en\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since 1995, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), has been developing tools to meet the challenges of having different insolvency laws managing a single cross-border insolvency. By 1997, UNCITRAL’s Working Group V completed the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. By September 2020, the original model law has been adopted by 48 countries. In Rubin v. Eurofinance SA, the U.K. Supreme Court cited a lack of authority to recognize a U.S. insolvency-related judgment in the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. As a result of this decision, UNCITRAL’s Working Group V developed the Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments.<br><br>This Note intends to address this following question: does this second model law provide a statutory basis to reverse the case law established by Rubin in the U.K.? This Note will demonstrate through an analysis of this new model law that a full implementation could potentially, but not definitely, provide such a basis. There is a small risk that a judge rejecting modified-universalism will not apply the new model law as designed to fix Rubin. Further, this Note will provide suggestions on where the new model law needs further direction or clarification to bring the U.K. and other relevant jurisdictions in line with the modified-universalist approach that UNCITRAL is targeting.<br>\",\"PeriodicalId\":199167,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"English Law: International (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"English Law: International (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18356/7e1c6ff4-en\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Law: International (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18356/7e1c6ff4-en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

自1995年以来,联合国国际贸易法委员会(贸易法委员会)一直在开发工具,以应对用不同的破产法管理单一跨国界破产所带来的挑战。到1997年,贸易法委员会第五工作组完成了《跨国界破产示范法》。到2020年9月,已有48个国家通过了最初的示范法。在Rubin诉Eurofinance SA案中,英国最高法院指出,英国缺乏承认《跨境破产示范法》中与美国破产有关的判决的权力。根据这一决定,贸易法委员会第五工作组制定了《承认和执行与破产有关的判决示范法》。本说明旨在解决以下问题:第二示范法是否为推翻鲁宾在英国建立的判例法提供了法定依据?本说明将通过对这一新的示范法的分析来证明,全面实施有可能(但不是绝对)提供这样一个基础。有一个小的风险是,拒绝修正普遍主义的法官不会适用旨在解决鲁宾案的新示范法。此外,本说明将就新的示范法在哪些方面需要进一步指导或澄清提出建议,以使联合王国和其他相关司法管辖区符合贸易法委员会所针对的修正的普遍主义做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Please Recognize Me: The United Kingdom Should Enact the Uncitral Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments
Since 1995, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), has been developing tools to meet the challenges of having different insolvency laws managing a single cross-border insolvency. By 1997, UNCITRAL’s Working Group V completed the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. By September 2020, the original model law has been adopted by 48 countries. In Rubin v. Eurofinance SA, the U.K. Supreme Court cited a lack of authority to recognize a U.S. insolvency-related judgment in the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. As a result of this decision, UNCITRAL’s Working Group V developed the Model Law on Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments.

This Note intends to address this following question: does this second model law provide a statutory basis to reverse the case law established by Rubin in the U.K.? This Note will demonstrate through an analysis of this new model law that a full implementation could potentially, but not definitely, provide such a basis. There is a small risk that a judge rejecting modified-universalism will not apply the new model law as designed to fix Rubin. Further, this Note will provide suggestions on where the new model law needs further direction or clarification to bring the U.K. and other relevant jurisdictions in line with the modified-universalist approach that UNCITRAL is targeting.
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
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