Suchergebnisse

The proper legal regulation of company rescue is of crucial importance since wealth of a country as well as wealth of society and its every member depends on it. Nevertheless, certain aspects of the aforesaid legal regulation still remain inappropriate in many countries and they not only do not facilitate the rescue of viable companies but also sometimes even create unjustified barriers to it. Consequently, viable companies experiencing temporary difficulties may be wound-up unfoundedly due to imperfectness of legal regulation without an attempt to rescue such companies and to overcome temporary difficulties faced by these companies or with an unsuccessful attempt to do that merely because there are no proper conditions ensured in particular countries. As a result, unjustified costs may be incurred that could be avoided if legal regulation of company rescue was reformed. In order to facilitate the implementation of such a legislative reform the best practice of legal regulation on judicial procedures for company rescue established in jurisdictions that are being studied is presented in this study as well as certain framework for regulation of these procedures that could serve as a point of reference when the issue of how to improve legal regulation is being addressed is developed. Legal regulation valid in the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has been chosen as the object of comparative analysis. This research is based not only on certain national laws but also on case law and certain studies of scholars of jurisprudence concerning issues that are being analysed.

The proper legal regulation of company rescue is of crucial importance since wealth of a country as well as wealth of society and its every member depends on it. Nevertheless, certain aspects of the aforesaid legal regulation still remain inappropriate in many countries and they not only do not facilitate the rescue of viable companies but also sometimes even create unjustified barriers to it. Consequently, viable companies experiencing temporary difficulties may be wound-up unfoundedly due to imperfectness of legal regulation without an attempt to rescue such companies and to overcome temporary difficulties faced by these companies or with an unsuccessful attempt to do that merely because there are no proper conditions ensured in particular countries. As a result, unjustified costs may be incurred that could be avoided if legal regulation of company rescue was reformed. In order to facilitate the implementation of such a legislative reform the best practice of legal regulation on judicial procedures for company rescue established in jurisdictions that are being studied is presented in this study as well as certain framework for regulation of these procedures that could serve as a point of reference when the issue of how to improve legal regulation is being addressed is developed. Legal regulation valid in the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has been chosen as the object of comparative analysis. This research is based not only on certain national laws but also on case law and certain studies of scholars of jurisprudence concerning issues that are being analysed.

The proper legal regulation of company rescue is of crucial importance since wealth of a country as well as wealth of society and its every member depends on it. Nevertheless, certain aspects of the aforesaid legal regulation still remain inappropriate in many countries and they not only do not facilitate the rescue of viable companies but also sometimes even create unjustified barriers to it. Consequently, viable companies experiencing temporary difficulties may be wound-up unfoundedly due to imperfectness of legal regulation without an attempt to rescue such companies and to overcome temporary difficulties faced by these companies or with an unsuccessful attempt to do that merely because there are no proper conditions ensured in particular countries. As a result, unjustified costs may be incurred that could be avoided if legal regulation of company rescue was reformed. In order to facilitate the implementation of such a legislative reform the best practice of legal regulation on judicial procedures for company rescue established in jurisdictions that are being studied is presented in this study as well as certain framework for regulation of these procedures that could serve as a point of reference when the issue of how to improve legal regulation is being addressed is developed. Legal regulation valid in the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has been chosen as the object of comparative analysis. This research is based not only on certain national laws but also on case law and certain studies of scholars of jurisprudence concerning issues that are being analysed.

The proper legal regulation of company rescue is of crucial importance since wealth of a country as well as wealth of society and its every member depends on it. Nevertheless, certain aspects of the aforesaid legal regulation still remain inappropriate in many countries and they not only do not facilitate the rescue of viable companies but also sometimes even create unjustified barriers to it. Consequently, viable companies experiencing temporary difficulties may be wound-up unfoundedly due to imperfectness of legal regulation without an attempt to rescue such companies and to overcome temporary difficulties faced by these companies or with an unsuccessful attempt to do that merely because there are no proper conditions ensured in particular countries. As a result, unjustified costs may be incurred that could be avoided if legal regulation of company rescue was reformed. In order to facilitate the implementation of such a legislative reform the best practice of legal regulation on judicial procedures for company rescue established in jurisdictions that are being studied is presented in this study as well as certain framework for regulation of these procedures that could serve as a point of reference when the issue of how to improve legal regulation is being addressed is developed. Legal regulation valid in the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has been chosen as the object of comparative analysis. This research is based not only on certain national laws but also on case law and certain studies of scholars of jurisprudence concerning issues that are being analysed.

The proper legal regulation of company rescue is of crucial importance since wealth of a country as well as wealth of society and its every member depends on it. Nevertheless, certain aspects of the aforesaid legal regulation still remain inappropriate in many countries and they not only do not facilitate the rescue of viable companies but also sometimes even create unjustified barriers to it. Consequently, viable companies experiencing temporary difficulties may be wound-up unfoundedly due to imperfectness of legal regulation without an attempt to rescue such companies and to overcome temporary difficulties faced by these companies or with an unsuccessful attempt to do that merely because there are no proper conditions ensured in particular countries. As a result, unjustified costs may be incurred that could be avoided if legal regulation of company rescue was reformed. In order to facilitate the implementation of such a legislative reform the best practice of legal regulation on judicial procedures for company rescue established in jurisdictions that are being studied is presented in this study as well as certain framework for regulation of these procedures that could serve as a point of reference when the issue of how to improve legal regulation is being addressed is developed. Legal regulation valid in the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has been chosen as the object of comparative analysis. This research is based not only on certain national laws but also on case law and certain studies of scholars of jurisprudence concerning issues that are being analysed.

The proper legal regulation of company rescue is of crucial importance since wealth of a country as well as wealth of society and its every member depends on it. Nevertheless, certain aspects of the aforesaid legal regulation still remain inappropriate in many countries and they not only do not facilitate the rescue of viable companies but also sometimes even create unjustified barriers to it. Consequently, viable companies experiencing temporary difficulties may be wound-up unfoundedly due to imperfectness of legal regulation without an attempt to rescue such companies and to overcome temporary difficulties faced by these companies or with an unsuccessful attempt to do that merely because there are no proper conditions ensured in particular countries. As a result, unjustified costs may be incurred that could be avoided if legal regulation of company rescue was reformed. In order to facilitate the implementation of such a legislative reform the best practice of legal regulation on judicial procedures for company rescue established in jurisdictions that are being studied is presented in this study as well as certain framework for regulation of these procedures that could serve as a point of reference when the issue of how to improve legal regulation is being addressed is developed. Legal regulation valid in the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has been chosen as the object of comparative analysis. This research is based not only on certain national laws but also on case law and certain studies of scholars of jurisprudence concerning issues that are being analysed.

The proper legal regulation of company rescue is of crucial importance since wealth of a country as well as wealth of society and its every member depends on it. Nevertheless, certain aspects of the aforesaid legal regulation still remain inappropriate in many countries and they not only do not facilitate the rescue of viable companies but also sometimes even create unjustified barriers to it. Consequently, viable companies experiencing temporary difficulties may be wound-up unfoundedly due to imperfectness of legal regulation without an attempt to rescue such companies and to overcome temporary difficulties faced by these companies or with an unsuccessful attempt to do that merely because there are no proper conditions ensured in particular countries. As a result, unjustified costs may be incurred that could be avoided if legal regulation of company rescue was reformed. In order to facilitate the implementation of such a legislative reform the best practice of legal regulation on judicial procedures for company rescue established in jurisdictions that are being studied is presented in this study as well as certain framework for regulation of these procedures that could serve as a point of reference when the issue of how to improve legal regulation is being addressed is developed. Legal regulation valid in the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has been chosen as the object of comparative analysis. This research is based not only on certain national laws but also on case law and certain studies of scholars of jurisprudence concerning issues that are being analysed.

The proper legal regulation of company rescue is of crucial importance since wealth of a country as well as wealth of society and its every member depends on it. Nevertheless, certain aspects of the aforesaid legal regulation still remain inappropriate in many countries and they not only do not facilitate the rescue of viable companies but also sometimes even create unjustified barriers to it. Consequently, viable companies experiencing temporary difficulties may be wound-up unfoundedly due to imperfectness of legal regulation without an attempt to rescue such companies and to overcome temporary difficulties faced by these companies or with an unsuccessful attempt to do that merely because there are no proper conditions ensured in particular countries. As a result, unjustified costs may be incurred that could be avoided if legal regulation of company rescue was reformed. In order to facilitate the implementation of such a legislative reform the best practice of legal regulation on judicial procedures for company rescue established in jurisdictions that are being studied is presented in this study as well as certain framework for regulation of these procedures that could serve as a point of reference when the issue of how to improve legal regulation is being addressed is developed. Legal regulation valid in the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania has been chosen as the object of comparative analysis. This research is based not only on certain national laws but also on case law and certain studies of scholars of jurisprudence concerning issues that are being analysed.

It is generally acknowledged that viable companies should have an opportunity to get a fresh start or a second chance. Governments are increasingly reforming the regulation in force with a view to giving priority to company rescue and preservation of companies (but not to involuntary liquidation of a company); the new approach of the European Union towards company failures and insolvency is also based on this idea. However, certain regulatory aspects of the judicial procedures of company rescue in a number of countries remain problematic and constitute obstacles to rescue even viable companies. One of such problematic aspects is regulation related to preserving contracts during the judicial procedures of company rescue.The success of company rescue process greatly depends on ensuring continuity of contracts. However, the regulation existing in most of the countries that are analyzed in this article (i.e. Great Britain, Germany and Lithuania, except for France) does not create appropriate conditions for ensuring stability of contractual relationship and therefore requires improvement. It needs to be noted that the greatest threat to the stability of the contractual relationship during the rescue procedure is posed by ipso facto provisions. Ipso facto provisions can prejudice the interests of both a company being rescued and stakeholders who are interested in rescue of the company because these provisions may become an obstacle to rescue even viable companies. Therefore, in order to avoid this and to facilitate the preservation of viable companies, legislation governing company rescue should provide for the prohibition of ipso facto provisions. In addition to this, such legislation should also provide for adequate protection of the legitimate interests of the contractors who will be forced to continue to fulfil their obligations, which they assumed before the beginning of the rescue procedure, during the rescue procedure. ; Straipsnyje nagrinėjamas įmonių gaivinimo teisminių procedūrų reglamentavimas, įtvirtintas Didžiojoje Britanijoje, Vokietijoje, Prancūzijoje ir Lietuvoje, siekiant įvertinti, ar minėtose jurisdikcijose yra užtikrinamas sutarčių išsaugojimas šių procedūrų metu. Straipsnyje remiamasi atitinkamais nagrinėjamų valstybių teisės aktais, teismų suformuota praktika ir užsienio autorių mokslo darbais.

This article examines the regulation of the formal rescue procedures of insolvent companies in Lithuania, United Kingdom, the United States of America and Germany. Consideration is given to whether insolvent companies should be given a fresh start and whether the formal rescue procedures, which might be used as an alternative to a compulsory liquidation, should be introduced in the national legislation. The article is based on the certain legislation of the analysed countries and scientific studies from Lithuania and foreign countries.

Straipsnyje nagrinėjamas nemokių įmonių gaivinimo formalių procedūrų reglamentavimas Lietuvoje, Didžiojoje Britanijoje, Jungtinėse Amerikos Valstijose ir Vokietijoje. Svarstoma, ar nemokioms įmonėms turėtų būti suteikiamas antras šansas, ar valstybių nacionaliniuose teisės aktuose turėtų būti įtvirtintos formalios nemokių įmonių gaivinimo procedūros, kuriomis būtų galima pasinaudoti kaip priverstinio likvidavimo alternatyva. Straipsnyje remiamasi atitinkamais nagrinėjamų valstybių teisės aktais bei Lietuvos ir užsienio autorių mokslo darbais. This article examines the regulation of the formal rescue procedures of insolvent companies in Lithuania, United Kingdom, the United States of America and Germany. Consideration is given to whether insolvent companies should be given a fresh start and whether the formal rescue procedures, which might be used as an alternative to a compulsory liquidation, should be introduced in the national legislation. The article is based on the certain legislation of the analysed countries and scientific studies from Lithuania and foreign countries.

This article examines the regulation of the formal rescue procedures of insolvent companies in Lithuania, United Kingdom, the United States of America and Germany. Consideration is given to whether insolvent companies should be given a fresh start and whether the formal rescue procedures, which might be used as an alternative to a compulsory liquidation, should be introduced in the national legislation. The article is based on the certain legislation of the analysed countries and scientific studies from Lithuania and foreign countries.

This article examines the regulation of the formal rescue procedures of insolvent companies in Lithuania, United Kingdom, the United States of America and Germany. Consideration is given to whether insolvent companies should be given a fresh start and whether the formal rescue procedures, which might be used as an alternative to a compulsory liquidation, should be introduced in the national legislation. The article is based on the certain legislation of the analysed countries and scientific studies from Lithuania and foreign countries.

This article examines the regulation of the formal rescue procedures of insolvent companies in Lithuania, United Kingdom, the United States of America and Germany. Consideration is given to whether insolvent companies should be given a fresh start and whether the formal rescue procedures, which might be used as an alternative to a compulsory liquidation, should be introduced in the national legislation. The article is based on the certain legislation of the analysed countries and scientific studies from Lithuania and foreign countries.