论文部分内容阅读
跨界破产管辖权冲突及其协调是跨界破产法首先需要攻克的难题。随着各国在跨界破产领域国际合作趋势的不断加强,逐渐形成了以主要破产程序为中心,辅之若干属地程序处理跨界破产案件的模式。并且,在主要破产程序管辖权确定上提出“债务人主要利益中心”的新标准。2002年5月31日生效的《欧盟破产程序规则》(简称《欧盟规则》)采用的就是这种立法模式。《欧盟规则》实施以来,在欧盟境内发生了大量适用该标准确定跨界破产管辖权的司法判例。这些判例有的很好地贯彻《欧盟规则》的原旨,彰显“主要利益中心”标准对传统标准的超越和优势;同时,也有一些判例反映出这一新标准潜在的问题。特别在跨国公司集团破产案件中如何确定债务人主要利益中心问题上,实践中存在很大分歧。
The conflict of cross-border insolvency jurisdiction and its coordination are the problems to be overcome first in cross-border insolvency law. With the continuous strengthening of international cooperation in cross-border insolvency, the gradual formation of the mode of handling cross-border insolvency cases with a focus on major insolvency proceedings supplemented by a number of territorial procedures has gradually taken shape. Moreover, a new standard of “center of main interests of debtors” was put forward on the determination of the jurisdiction of the major insolvency proceedings. This model of legislation is adopted by the EU Rules for Bankruptcy (“EU Rules”), which came into force on 31 May 2002. Since the implementation of the EU Rules, a great deal of judicial precedents have been applied in the EU to apply the standard to determine cross-border insolvency jurisdiction. Some of these jurisprudence well implement the principle of “EU rules”, highlight the “major center of interests” beyond the traditional standards and advantages; the same time, there are some jurisprudence that reflects the potential problems of this new standard. Especially in the group of multinational corporations bankruptcy cases how to determine the center of the debtor’s main interests, there are many differences in practice.