| The international consensus on cross-border insolvency law accepts the modified universalism and recognizes the extraterritorial effect of insolvency proceedings. However, when formulating specific cross-border insolvency rules in accordance with modified universalism, different countries have adopted different normative paths and interpretation benchmarks and made different local choices based on their own insolvency law objectives and national economic and political purposes. With the continuous opening up to the outside world, China is faced with an increasing number of cross-border insolvency cases and needs to participate more actively in international insolvency legislation and practice. The Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency should be used as the reference basis for the future reform of China’s cross-border insolvency system, but it is necessary to understand the flexibility of the model law in application and interpretation. Based on its economic legislative objectives and the special structure of enterprises, China should maintain a balance between building an international institutional framework to attract foreign investment and effectively protecting local creditors and public interests. The jurisdiction over the initiation of insolvency proceedings should be determined based on the center of main interests and the jurisdiction over insolvency derivative litigation should be clarified. The applicable law of insolvency proceedings should be distinguished from the applicable law of determining creditor-debtor relationships, and the concept of creditor protection behind the Gibbs rule should be correctly understood. In terms of recognition and assistance, legal barriers to reciprocity should be eliminated, the insolvency procedure attributes of arrangement plans should not be denied, the scope of assistance should be clarified, and international cooperation should be strengthened. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号