Worldwide: New UNCITRAL Model Law To Facilitate Cross-Border Restructuring And Insolvency

Summary

UNCITRAL has adopted and published a second model law to promote universalism of restructuring and insolvency. This new model law is now readily available for domestic implementation across the world. The earlier model law has been implemented in only 44 U.S. states since its publication in 1997. This client alert explains the differences between implementation in the UK and the U.S., and highlights barriers to implementation in the UK as well as the lack of an imperative for implementation in the U.S. This alert will be of particular interest to those focusing on the development of cross-border restructuring and insolvency.

How Is UNCITRAL's New Model Law Affecting Insolvency?

The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law ("UNCITRAL") has published its final version of 'The Model Law on the Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments' ("Model Law on IRJ"). The Model Law on IRJ provides a framework for the recognition and enforcement of judgments made in foreign jurisdictions which arise out of insolvency proceedings.

This is the second model law adopted by UNCITRAL which promotes a universalist approach to restructuring and insolvency proceedings. The Model Law on IRJ is drafted as a standalone law but is largely viewed as a supplement to the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency ("Model Law on CBI"), which was adopted by UNCITRAL in 1997.

Much like the Model Law on CBI, the Model Law on IRJ does not have any legal effect until it is implemented domestically. The implementation of the Model Law on CBI has been gradual: only 44 states in total have adopted the Model Law on CBI into their legislative framework since 1997. The Model Law on CBI was introduced in the U.S. in the form of Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 and in the UK in the form of the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 ("CBIR").

Universalism v Territorialism in Restructuring and Insolvency Proceedings

The principle of universalism in the context of cross-border insolvency is that proceedings in relation to a debtor should be applicable worldwide, thereby necessitating only one primary insolvency proceeding. This obviates the need for multiple proceedings as well as the potential for conflict arising from a territorial approach.

As an instrument, the Model Law on CBI promotes universalism. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court held in 2014 that: "Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code, which adopted the substance and most of the text of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law's ('UNCITRAL') Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, provides a framework for recognizing and giving effect to foreign insolvency proceedings. . . . A central tenet of chapter 15 is the importance of comity in cross-border insolvency proceedings."1

UNCITRAL's Working Group V has since its 44th session in December 2013 been reflecting on a response to the decision in Rubin (discussed below) and by the 46th session in December 2014, UNCITRAL had given Working Group V "a mandate to develop a model law or model legislative provisions to provide for the recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgements."2 The 53rd session of Working Group V in May 2018 approved the final text of the Model Law on IRJ, which was adopted by UNCITRAL at its 1080th meeting on 2 July 2018 and published on 18 September 2018.

Ilya Kokorin of Leiden University has stated: "The adoption of the Model Law on the Recognition and Enforcement of Insolvency-Related Judgments is undoubtedly a step in the right direction [as] it has the potential of making cross-border insolvencies more predictable, complete and efficient."3

In the UK, Was the Model Law on CBI Inadequate to Promote Universalism?

In the UK at present, there are two significant impediments to universalism: Rubin and The Rule in Gibbs.

Rubin:

Despite the Model Law on CBI having been in force in the UK since 2007 under the CBIR, the UK Supreme Court in 2012 curtailed a universalist approach to insolvency proceedings with its decision in Rubin v Eurofinance.4 The court refused to recognise an avoidance order made in a U.S. insolvency proceeding on the grounds that, in the UK, a judgment entered in personam cannot be enforced against a person who has not submitted to the jurisdiction of the court entering the judgment. Since the defendant had not been present in the U.S. at the time the proceedings were issued and had not otherwise submitted to the jurisdiction of the U.S. court, the UK court refused to enforce the judgment, stating that there should be no difference between judgments entered in insolvency cases and non-insolvency cases. The Model Law on CBI made no difference to the issue. As a result, a judgment derived from foreign insolvency proceedings will, under the CBIR, be recognised by the English court only if it could have been granted on its terms in England.

The facts of Rubin related to an avoidance action but it is generally thought that the reasoning in Rubin would equally extend to a restructuring plan sanctioned by a foreign court (as well as potentially other scenarios) - a creditor not subject to the personal jurisdiction of a foreign court is able to object to the plan endorsed by the foreign court if enforcement is sought generally or against a creditor personally, in the UK.

The Rule in Gibbs:

The 'Rule in Gibbs' has formed an integral part of English common law since the 19th century. The rule provides that a debt governed by English law cannot be discharged or altered by a foreign law (including a foreign insolvency proceeding). The modern-day application of the rule receives widespread criticism, being described as 'anachronistic and Anglo-centric'5 and worse. U.S. courts have on numerous occasions enforced foreign judgments which alter debts or claims governed by U.S. law, including judgments made by courts in the UK. Nevertheless, it continues to be applied in UK courts6 and some commentators suggest that it would require legislative intervention before it is overturned.

If Implemented in the UK, Will the Model Law on IRJ Address the Rule In Gibbs and Rubin?7

Yes and maybe.

The Rule in Gibbs would be overridden by the Model Law on IRJ owing to the mandatory obligation, as set out in Article 12, to recognise and enforce insolvency-related judgments.

If Rubin was reheard in the UK applying the Model Law on IRJ, there is still some question as to whether an English court would consider it has discretion not to enforce the judgment. Article 14(g) specifies circumstances in which the court‎ has discretion to refuse recognition and enforcement of a foreign insolvency-related judgment, in dispensation of the mandatory obligation to do so set out in Article 12. Article 14(g) is drafted so that the discretion to refuse recognition and enforcement arises if none of the specified ‎sub-paragraphs concerning jurisdiction are satisfied:

(i) the party against whom the judgment was issued consented to jurisdiction of the foreign court;

(ii) ‎the party against whom the judgment was issued submitted to the jurisdiction of the foreign court by arguing on the merits of the case without objecting to jurisdiction;

(iii) the court exercised jurisdiction on a basis on which the [English] Court could have exercised jurisdiction; and

(iv) the court exercised jurisdiction on a basis not inconsistent with English law.8

In Rubin, neither (i) nor (ii) nor (iv) would have applied. The principal concern is that the thing about which the court 'exercised jurisdiction' in paragraph (iii) is not specified. So it is unclear whether the thing against which jurisdiction was exercised is limited to some or all of: the debtor; a creditor; creditors generally; or some other relevant person, or perhaps the thing has some other meaning. If it is limited, it is then not possible to say whether the precedent set by Rubin will be overturned by the Model Law on IRJ. However, if it is unlimited in its application to the debtor, a creditor, creditors generally, or some other relevant person, then a defendant in an avoidance action will likely be an 'other relevant person' and therefore the judgment in Rubin would be enforced in the UK.

Implementation in the U.S. and the UK

In the UK, implementing the Model Law on IRJ will be resisted by those who see value in maintaining the Rule in Gibbs. There are many who consider that the Rule in Gibbs is popular with investors who choose English law for their finance documents for the very reason that it cannot be impacted by the laws (including insolvency laws) of other jurisdictions. There is, as mentioned above, a heavy body of those with the contrary view. In any event, the implementation of the Model Law on IRJ is unlikely to be presented for legislative consideration until after planned reforms of UK insolvency law which the UK government proposes to implement.

In the U.S., it seems to us as though there are fewer impediments to implementing the Model Law on IRJ, and yet less imperative to do so than in the UK. That situation could well beg U.S. legislators to scrutinise why they would introduce the law, for which an answer may not be forthcoming for some time yet.

Footnotes

1 In re Rede Energia S.A. 515 BR 69 (Bankr. SD NY, 2014)

2 UNCITRAL Working Group V report on cross-border recognition and enforcement of insolvency-related judgments delivered at 48th session, A/CN.9/WG.V/WP.135.

3 https://leidenlawblog.nl/articles/uncitral-model-law-on-insolvency-related-judgments-new-chapter-in-internati.

4 [2012] UKSC 46.

5 https://lawofinsolvency.wordpress.com/2018/03/11/bakhshiyeva-v-sberbank-2018-ewhc-59-ch-cbir-2006-recognition-orders-and-the-rule-in-anthony-gibbs/.

6 Re OJSC International Bank of Azerbaijan [2018] EWHC 59 (Ch), which is listed for appeal in late October 2018.

7 We should point out that there are a number of brackets and options which are TBC for each state when implementing the Model Law on IRJ. Note also that UNCITRAL will shortly publish a Guide to Enactment for the Model Law on IRJ, which may bear upon its interpretation.

8 Articles 14(g)(i)-(iv) respectively, Model Law on IRJ.

Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions