| Although the World Bank Group’s Doing Business Indicators (DBIs) can make up for the shortcoming of “black box problem” in comparative law caused by the lack of clear metrics, it is biased in legal origins and flawed in measurement, and its pursuit of uniform best rules may lead to regulatory moral hazard. The World Bank’s Resolving Insolvency Indicators (RII) also has such problems as flaws in procedures and objects of assessment, defects in measurement methods which can’t truly reflect the recovery rate, and misunderstandings on going concern value of reorganization regime. In China, the new financing rule, the voting rule of impaired parties, the rule on information accessibility for creditors and other rules set forth in the Judicial Interpretation III of Enterprise Bankruptcy Law, which benchmarks the RII, are imperfect and still need some improvements. The existing rules of executive contract and of best interests of creditors, which got the full scores by RII, fail to respond effectively to the demands of practice due to some defects. Indicators of the efficiency of bankruptcy law should focus on assessing the fulfillment of two objects, namely the optimal allocation of control and assets of the insolvent firms and the protection of the expected return on investment before and after firms’ bankruptcy, such as ensuring the efficiency and bottom-line fairness of collective resolutions in insolvency proceedings, and rationally allocating the decision-making power of new financing among the trustees, creditors’ meetings and the court. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号