Research On Legal Issues Regarding To The Protection Of Bankruptcy Claims In International Insolvency

Positions and interests of cross-border enterprises in nations turn to be morecomplicated following the activities of cross-border investment and trade more a morepopular and frequent. Along with sorts of operation failure and debt morass emerged,the amount of cross-border cases increases as well. However, as national economiescross the world have developed unbalanced and sovereign countries tend toprotectionism when they confront conflicts between protections of territorial creditorsand overseas creditors, bankruptcy law cross the world becomes various and inadequateto effectively realize justice and equality in liquidation and distribution manner. Forrealizing justice in distribution of bankruptcy claims, bankruptcy procedure internallyrequires a united rule of procedure, while it lakes of which in international society.When these cross-border enterprises fall in morass or meet failures, assets of whichwould be treasure to creditors which stimulated to claim for the asset to fulfill theirproperty rights. Under the situations above when there are sorts of conflicts, it mightmore or less affect debtors to quit the market effectively and efficiently. Further, theconflicts would indirectly influent national real economy and macro economy. To theproblems aforesaid, this paper plan to focus on international society, especially on thosecountries who adopt a manner of comparative open in settlement of cross-borderinsolvency cases or their national bankruptcy law, with the principle of “raising lightwith clear and heavy”, illustrating relevant conflicts and complexity cross borders.Further demonstrating the author’s argument, refer to ratify unified rules of bankruptcyprocedure and it is possibility to achieve cross-border bankruptcy.It is not only, with certain rule or institution, can it fulfill protection of internationalinsolvency claims, but however, with a unified procedure of liquidated and distributedas foundation. Particularly, when debtors’ assets and creditors allocated and residesanywhere worldwide, the priory principal of bankruptcy law would not exit no longer incase there is not such a mechanism. Since it lacks of international law and laws ofcountries differ from each other, conflicts on jurisdiction, choice of law and recognitionof judgment turned to be white-hot. At meantime, the three issues are not blocked, butinteracted. The author discover that, a united rule not only respects concepts ofbankruptcy law, but also would not over encroach on public and other interests ofsovereign countries. It probably tends to improve the protection given to bankruptcy creditors, meanwhile, to decrease injury on market exit of debtors and enthusiasm ofcreditors to cross-border investment with a mean of united.