Suchergebnisse

The globalization of business activity necessarily entails contacts with a diverse array of national laws and legal systems, and insolvencies in this context often have transnational consequences. In such situations, there is a clash of competing national laws on weighty questions including the recognition of security interests, processes related to the disbursal of assets, and different policy preferences underlying the protection of different kinds of creditors. These clashes pose difficulties because each country has framed its insolvency laws in response to particular political exigencies and the policy preferences of its citizens, reflecting different bargains between creditor and debtor protection. Despite its enormous financial importance and academic complexity, cross-border insolvency law remains in a state of confusion. This Article analyzes the recognition and enforcement of cross-border insolvency judgments from the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia to determine whether the UNCITRAL Model Law's goal of modified universalism is currently being practiced, and subjects the Model Law to analysis through the lens of international relations theories to elaborate a way forward. We posit that courts could use the express language of the Model Law text to confer recognition and enforcement of foreign insolvency judgments. The adoption of our proposal will reduce costs, maximize recovery for creditors, and ensure predictability for all parties.

There is a pervading sense of unease that artificially intelligent machines will soon radically alter our lives in ways that are still unknown. Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) technology are developing at an extremely rapid rate as computational power continues to grow exponentially. Even if existential concerns about AI do not materialize, there are enough concrete examples of problems associated with current applications of AI to warrant concern about the level of control that exists over developments in this field. Some form of regulation is likely necessary to protect society from harm. However, advances in regulatory capacity have not kept pace with developments in new technologies, including AL. This is partly because regulation has become decentered; that is, the traditional role of public regulators such as governments commanding regulation has dissipated, and other participants including those from within the industry have taken the lead. Other contributing factors are dwindling government resources on one hand and the increased power of technology companies on the other. These factors have left the field of AI development relatively unregulated. Whatever the reason, it is now more difficult for traditional public regulatory bodies to control the development of AI. In the vacuum, industry participants have begun to self-regulate by promoting soft law options such as codes of practice and standards. This Article argues that despite the reduced authority of public regulatory agencies, the risks associated with runaway AI require regulators to begin to participate in what is largely an unregulated field. In an environment where resources are scarce, governments or public regulators must develop new ways of regulating. This Article proposes solutions to regulating the development of AI ex ante through a two-step process: first, governments can set expectations and send signals to influence participants in AI development. The Authors adopt the term "nudging" to refer to this type of influencing. ...