Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

European Corporate Insolvency Law: an analysis of the corporate rescue laws of France, Greece and the United Kingdom

By Alexandra Kastrinou


The thesis focuses on European corporate insolvency law by reference to the laws as developed of three different jurisdictions, namely France, Greece and the United Kingdom. The thesis is aimed at providing an analysis of the insolvency laws of the three jurisdictions, while the main focus is on the corporate rescue mechanisms that are available in the three jurisdictions. Although the thesis provides an overview of the historical background of the insolvency law regime in each of the three jurisdictions, it, particularly, focuses on reforms introduced within the last decade, namely from the early 2000s. The key concern of this research is to provide an account of the similarities of and differences between the French, Greek and the United Kingdom’s insolvency laws and with the use of comparative law to identify the strengths and weaknesses of each system and to assess the effectiveness of the reforms recently introduced in each jurisdiction. Although the thesis acknowledges the evolution of convergence between the insolvency law regimes of the three jurisdictions, it does not aspire to propose substantive harmonisation of cross-border insolvency. Furthermore, the thesis offers a conceptual analysis of the legal concept of corporate rescue, and identifies the underlying factors in relation to the insolvency and rescue laws of the three jurisdictions, such as their social, political and legal cultures. Additionally, the thesis provides an analysis of the role of certain key ‘actors’ which are affecting the outcome of rescue proceedings, such as the management of a distressed company, the courts, insolvency practitioners and creditors. The consideration of such contextual factors enables one not only to identify and understand the differences between the rescue laws of each jurisdiction but also to assess the influence of the insolvency laws of other jurisdictions, such as the United States, on the shaping of a corporate rescue culture in the three European states. By way of consideration of the wider European context the thesis also discusses the European Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings. This Regulation is of note as an indicator of European Union policy, which has been to harmonise conflict of laws procedures but to leave the member states to develop for themselves insolvency procedures that they consider to be most suitable

Publisher: University of Leicester
Year: 2010
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2009). (Editors and authors),
  2. (2009). 10 Consultation: Encouraging Company Rescue- A Summary of Responses,
  3. (2005). 241 Article 92, Law of 2005. still 242Fried
  4. (1986). 244 For instance, following the appointment of the administrator, directors may be called to provide a statement of the company’s affairs. See IA
  5. (1986). 263 For instance, as mentioned above, in the United Kingdom upon the appointment of the administrator, the existing management is required to co-operate with him and may be asked to provide a statement of the company’s affairs. See IA
  6. (1978). 37 Cambridge L.J., 313 Watson, A., “Legal Transplants and European Private Law”
  7. (2002). 4 (Jul), Insolvency L.J.
  8. (2008). A Comparative Analysis of Administration Regimes
  9. (2008). A Comparative Analysis of Administration Regimes in Australia and the United Kingdom” in Omar P., International Insolvency Law: Themes and Perspectives (Ashgate Publishing,
  10. (1990). A Comparison of Bankruptcy Reorganisation
  11. (2002). A Corporate Governance And Bankruptcy: A Comparative Study”,
  12. (2004). A Critical Evaluation of the Development and Reform of the Corporate Rescue Procedures in France”
  13. (2008). A practical insight to cross-border Corporate Recovery & Insolvency: Greece”
  14. (2007). A Preliminary Analysis of Prepackaged Administrations, Report to The Association of Business Recovery Professionals in
  15. (2004). Administrative Receivership and Administration—An Analysis”
  16. (2000). An Agency Cost Analysis of the Wrongful Trading Provisions”
  17. An Analysis of Pre-packaged Administrations: An Update” presented on
  18. (2006). Annotated Guide to the Insolvency Legislation
  19. (2010). Article 111 and Article 117 of Law of 2007; see also F Kalliri, “New Bankruptcy Code that Does Not Terminate...” Kathimerini, available at last accessed on 20th
  20. (2006). Asking the Right Questions? Highs and Lows of the ECJ Judgement in Eurofood,
  21. (2008). Availability of continuing financing in corporate reorganizations: the UK and US perspective”
  22. (2006). available at Report: A Review of Company Rescue and Business Reconstruction Mechanisms, Insolvency Service.
  23. (2002). Bargaining in the Shadow of the Enterprise Act
  24. (2007). Basic Innovations of the New Insolvency Code” 21/2/2008, available at:
  25. Because Of French Sauvegarde Proceedings”
  26. (2006). Better late Than Never: The UNCITRAL Model Law Enters Into Force In Great Britain”
  27. (2010). Blows Through An English Brothel”
  28. Bondholder Schemes of Arrangement: Playing
  29. (1995). Certified Accountants Educational Trust.
  30. (2004). Chapter 11 a la Française: French Insolvency Reforms”
  31. (2007). Co-operation In Areas Not Directly Addressed Under the EU Regulation 1346/2000,
  32. (2004). Commercial Law (3rd edn, Penguin Books,
  33. (1987). Companies: Exceptions from the Restriction On The Re-Use of Company Names”
  34. (2008). Company Voluntary Arrangements and Rescues: A New Hope and a Tudor Orthodoxy”
  35. (2004). Concentrated Ownership And Control Of Corporate Reorganisations”
  36. (2010). Consultation: Encouraging Corporate Rescue” available at: sc09.pdf last accessed on
  37. (2005). Control and Coordination in Corporate Rescue”
  38. (2007). Control and corporate rescue – an Anglo-American evaluation”
  39. (1999). Controlling the Insolvency Professionals”
  40. (1990). Corporate Control: Markets and Rules”
  41. (2004). Corporate Insolvency in an Era of Increased Legal Complexity”,
  42. (2009). Corporate Insolvency Law: Perspectives and Principles (2nd edn, CUP,
  43. (2005). Corporate Insolvency Law: Theory and Application (OUP,
  44. (2002). Corporate Ownership Structure and the Evolution of Bankruptcy Law: Lessons From the United Kingdom”
  45. (2008). Corporate rescue Law: An Anglo-American Perspective (Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd,
  46. (2000). Corporate Rescue Reform in the UK”,
  47. (1997). Corporate Rescue: A Conceptual Approach to Insolvency Law (Sweet
  48. (2006). Corporate Rescue: An Overview of Recent Developments from Selected Countries (2nd edn,
  49. (2004). Creditor and Debtor Oriented Corporate Bankruptcy Regimes Revisited”
  50. (2006). Creditor Participation in Insolvency Proceedings, Report
  51. (2002). Cross-Border Insolvency within the European Union: Dawn Of A New Era”,
  52. (1994). CVAs: A Neglected Lifeline?”
  53. (2005). Defining Insolvency: The Evolution of the Concept of ‘Cessation de Paiements' in French Law”
  54. (2005). Doctoring in the Shadows of Insolvency”
  55. (1997). Early Warning Indicators of Corporate Failure (Ashgate,
  56. (1997). Egxeiridio Emporikou Dikaiou (Vol.3) “Ptoxeysi Kai Exygiansi”
  57. (1996). EU Regulation on Insolvency Proceedings: The First Year and the Outlook From Greece” available at Bird, C., “The London Approach”
  58. (2004). European Insolvency Law (Ashgate Publishing,
  59. (1990). Financial Distress, reorganisation and Organisational Efficiency”
  60. (2009). Flexibility in France”
  61. (1981). For instance, in France, the judicial rescue procedure (redressement 264 See A Schwartz, “Security Interests and Bankruptcy Priorities: A Review of Current Theories”
  62. (2004). France: The Regime Governing Directors’ Liability in Insolvency and Reform Perspectives”
  63. French Bankruptcy Law: Putting the Safeguards in
  64. (2005). French Insolvency Law: Remodelling the Reforms of
  65. (2004). French Insolvency Law: The
  66. French Insolvency Reforms Aim to Help Businesses”
  67. (2005). Global Venue Controls Are Coming: A Reply to Professor LoPucki”
  68. (1996). How to Compare Now”,
  69. (2002). In Search of a Rescue Regime: The Enterprise Act
  70. (2005). Insolvency
  71. (2002). Insolvency and the Enterprise Act
  72. (2007). Insolvency in Private International Law, Supplement to the 2nd Edition,
  73. (2006). Insolvency Law and Practice in France”
  74. (2006). Insolvency Law and Practice in France” available in GromeK Broc, and Parry, Corporate Rescue: An Overview of Recent Developments from Selected Countries (Kluwer Law International,
  75. (1991). Introduction: Monsters, Machines and Sociotechnical Relations, in his (Ed.), A Sociology of Monsters:
  76. Is the Law Too Favourable To Secured
  77. (2002). Is the Open Method of Co-ordination Appropriate for Organising Activities at European Level in Sensitive Policy Areas?”
  78. (1997). Issues of Insolvency Law,
  79. (1986). it worth noting that an 256 The moratorium takes effect when the appointment of the administrator has effect. See IA
  80. (2008). La loi des sauvegarde des enterprises: nécessité et interêt d'une réforme annoncée” (Recueil Dalloz,
  81. (1998). Law 2601/1998 on ‘Financial aid to private investments for the economic and regional state development’
  82. (2006). Law: Putting the Safeguards in Place”
  83. (2005). Liability Risk for Outside Directors: A Cross Border Analysis” European Financial Management
  84. (2005). Living Interesting Times – Reflections on The EC Regulation On Insolvency Proceedings: Part 1”,
  85. (2000). Making a Silk Purse out of a Pig’s Ear-Medforth v.
  86. (2008). Management Rescue Orbis in ‘Pre-pack’
  87. Moratoria on enforcement rights: revisiting corporate rescue” [2004] Conveyancer and Property Law 89.
  88. (1997). Normative Bricolage: Informal Rule-Making by Accountants And Lawyers in Mega Insolvencies,
  89. (2001). Norms in Private Insolvency: the ‘London Approach’ to the Resolution of Financial Distress”
  90. (1995). Not So Different?” in M Freeman & R Halson Current Law Problems
  91. (2003). note 105 above, para.4-42, at p.54-56. See also L Linklater, “The Enterprise Act: Fulfilling Great Expectations”
  92. (1996). note 226 above, at p. 217-218. See also
  93. (2003). On Fairness and Efficiency”
  94. (1967). on judicial settlement, liquidation of goods, personal bankruptcy and criminal bankruptcies, implemented by Decree 67-1120 of 22nd
  95. (1985). on the judicial rescue and liquidation of businesses, implemented by Decrees 85-1387 and 85-1388 of 27th
  96. (2009). Perfecting the Union, Perfecting Universalism, Published version in (2009) 2 Corporate Rescue and Insolvency 71, also available in Universalism.pdf
  97. (2006). Pre-Pack Administrations- A Regulatory Perspective”,
  98. (2006). Pre-Pack: He Who Pays the Piper Calls the Tune”,
  99. (2006). Pre-packaged Administration: The Legal Framework”
  100. (2006). Pre-packs from the Valuer’s Perspective”,
  101. (2006). Prepackaged administrations—trick or treat?”
  102. (2006). Prepackaged administrations: bargains in the shadow of insolvency or shadowy bargains”
  103. (2005). Principles of Corporate Insolvency Law (3 rd edn,
  104. (1998). Proprietary Rights and Unsecured Creditors, in the Realm of Company Law (The Hague: Kluwer International,
  105. Re DKLL Solicitors: Obtaining an Administration Order to Facilitate a Pre-Packaged Sale of the Business and Assets,
  106. (2006). Recent developments in France under the EU Regulation 1346” (2005) 18(8),
  107. (2002). Reforming the Governance of Corporate Rescue: The Enterprise Act
  108. Reforms to Lender Liability
  109. (2006). Regulating the Insolvency Office Holder Profession Across Borders, available in Crossing (Dutch) Borders In
  110. (2000). Regulation (EC)
  111. (2003). Reinvigorating Corporate Rescue”
  112. (2006). Report on Insolvency Outcomes, Paper presented to the Insolvency Service in
  113. (2010). Report: Harmonisation of Insolvency Law at EU Level,
  114. (2002). Rescue and Reconstruction”
  115. (2005). Research Handbook On Corporate Legal Responsibility (Edward Elgar Publishing,
  116. (2001). Rethinking Receivership”
  117. (2009). Sachs have each reduced staff by around 1,500 globally. See G Montia, “Lehman Brothers cuts London jobs”,
  118. (1986). Sch. B1 para. 56(2), the committee is to be given a wide range of powers under the Act, 1 See A Sakoui “Bankrupt Europeans are flocking to London”,
  119. (2004). Secured credit Under English And American Law (Cambridge,
  120. (1978). Secured Financing and Priorities among Creditors”
  121. (1999). Security and Corporate Rescue,
  122. (1999). Security, Insolvency and Risk: Who Pays the Price?” 62 Modern Law Review 633.
  123. (2006). Should We Redistribute in Insolvency”,
  124. (2009). SIP16: The Creditor’s Perspective,
  125. (2007). Skeleton Argument on Behalf of the Petitioners, In the Matter of Enron Directo SL” available at Moss, G., “Group Insolvency-Choice of Forum And Law; The European Experience Under the Influence of English Pragmatism”
  126. (2006). Study of Administration Cases, Report to the Insolvency Service in
  127. (2007). Superpriority new financing and corporate rescue”
  128. (2006). The Case for the Abolition of the Floating Charge”,
  129. (2007). The Difficulty of Proving Fraudulent Trading”
  130. (1976). The Draft EEC Convention: A Further Examination,
  131. The EC Regulation on Insolvency
  132. (1993). The Economic Implications of Attempting to Rescue Companies, in Insolvency Law: Theory And Practice,
  133. (2003). The Enterprise Act and Insolvency Law Reform”
  134. (2004). The Enterprise Act: New Economic Dawn or Disaster”
  135. The Enterprise Bill 2002-A Move Towards A Rescue Culture”
  136. (2010). The EU Framework for Cross-Border Crisis Management in the Banking Sector” INSOL WORLD, Third Quarter,
  137. (2003). The European Initiative on Wrongful Trading”
  138. (2003). The European Initiative On Wrongful Trading”,
  139. (2003). The European Insolvency Regulation 2000: A Paradigm of International Insolvency Co-Operation”
  140. (2006). The European Insolvency Regulation and the Treatment of Group Companies: An Analysis,
  141. (2006). The European Insolvency Regulation- the Case for Urgent Reform”
  142. (2000). The expenses of Financial Distress: The Direct Costs
  143. (1997). The Future of Corporate Rescue legislation In France: Part 1: History And reforms”
  144. (2004). The Harm Done by Administrative Receivership”
  145. (1986). The Impact of s.214 of the Insolvency Act
  146. (2002). The Impact of the Enterprise Act
  147. (2006). The Insolvency Regulation: A Criticism Of The Jurisdiction Paradigm”
  148. (2003). The jurisdiction of the English courts under the EC Regulation on insolvency proceedings”
  149. (1999). The Law of Bankruptcy, (Sakkoulas Publishers,
  150. (1998). The Law of Rejuvenation And Liquidation Of Problematic Companies (Sakkoulas Publications,
  151. (1999). The Nature and Functions of A Rescue Culture”
  152. (2004). The Past, Present and Future of Debtor In Possession Financing”
  153. (2004). The Powers of Administrators Under Schedule
  154. (1995). The Professional Restructuring of Corporate Rescue: Company Voluntary Arrangements and the London Approach,
  155. (2004). The Progress Of Reforms to Insolvency Law and Practice In France”
  156. (2005). The Recasting of Insolvency Law”
  157. (2002). The Reform of Corporate Insolvency Law in Great Britain-The Enterprise Bill
  158. (2001). The Reform Of Corporate Insolvency Law in Great Britain”,
  159. (2009). The Reform of UK Corporate Insolvency Laws: CVAs,
  160. (1997). The Rescue Culture in the United Kingdom”
  161. (2007). The rise of prepackaged corporate rescue on both sides of the Atlantic”
  162. (2006). The Thin Line in The Sand: Pre-packs and Phoenixes”,
  163. (2010). The Triumph of “fraternité”: ISA Daisytek SAS” available at, last accessed on 18th
  164. (2006). The Valuation of Distressed Companies: A Conceptual Framework,
  165. (2006). The Valuation of Distressed Companies: A Conceptual Framework, Part I”
  166. (1997). Thoughts on the Purpose of Corporate Rescue”
  167. (2009). Transparency and Prevention for Corporate Bankruptcy: A US- France Comparison”
  168. (2002). Transplanted Company Law: An Ideological And Cultural Analysis Of Market entry in Vietnam”,
  169. (2002). Turnaround Finance”
  170. (2006). TXU- CVA’s vs.425 schemes”
  171. UK Corporate Rescue: Recent Developments—Changes to Administrative Receiverships, Administration,
  172. (2000). UK Corporate Rescue: Recent Developments—Changes to Administrative Receiverships, Administration, and Company Voluntary Arrangements—The Insolvency Act
  173. (1974). Uses and Misuses of Comparative Law”,
  174. (1977). Uses, Misuses And Non uses Of Comparative Law”,
  175. (2006). Voluntary Arrangements (2 nd edn, LexisNexis Butterworths,
  176. (2000). Voluntary Arrangements: Contracts or Not? Part1”
  177. (1993). What courts do to secured creditors in Chapter 11 cram down”
  178. (2008). When Is a Proceeding Opened?”
  179. (2005). Whose COMI Is It Anyway?”
  180. (2005). Wrongful trading and the liability of company directors: the theoretical perspective”
  181. (2006). Wrongful trading and the point of liability”
  182. (1999). Wrongful Trading Is it a Real Threat to Directors or a Paper Tiger?”
  183. (2001). Wrongful Trading”

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.