China's Enterprise Bankruptcy Law (EBL 2006): Cross-Border Perspectives

With China's new Enterprise Bankruptcy Law (‘EBL 2006’) having come into effect on 1 June 2007, a critical issue arises as to the extent to which Article 5, as a cross-border provision, will strengthen creditors' rights across jurisdictions. In this paper attention will be paid in particular to how the Chinese People's Court is likely to exercise its discretion to grant recognition to a foreign court ruling, and vice versa. The paper will start with a brief introduction to the circumstances under which Article 5 came into being. The evolution of China's cross-border insolvency practices will be examined through an analysis of an inbound case of B&T (2002) as well as an outbound one of GITIC (2005). In spite of the fact that China has not adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law, essential factors deemed necessary to be considered by China's court and its counterparts in US and UK are to be highlighted throughout the paper. Although the effect of Article 5 remains to be seen, it will be critically analysed focusing on some controversial issues.

The death blow to unlimited liability in Victorian Britain: The City of Glasgow failure

In 1878, one of Britain's largest banks, the City of Glasgow Bank, collapsed, leaving a huge deficit between its assets and liabilities. As this bank, similar to many other contemporary British banks, had unlimited liability, its failure was accompanied by the bankruptcy of the vast majority of its stockholders. It is generally believed that the collapse of this depository institution revealed the extent to which ownership in large joint-stock banks had been diffused to investors of very modest means. It is also believed that the failure resulted in bank shareholders dumping their shares unto the market. Our evidence, garnered from ownership records, trading data, and stock prices, offers no support for these widely held beliefs. © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Responsible Leadership: Business Myth or Corporate Reality?

The financial crisis has highlighted some of the limitations of the global system. Enterprises previously thought to be too big to fail have learned the harsh realities of capitalism (Merill Lynch, Lehman Bros, Northern Rock), countries have been shaken considerably from the bankruptcy of Iceland to the near-collapse of the markets in Greece, Ireland and Italy. The current age of austerity has largely dominated supra-national and indeed global politics in the last few years. The extent of the crisis has illustrated that relationships between business, governments and society needs to be re-evaluated in light of shifts in the global market thereby recognizing that some countries have a more limited power of persuasion than some corporations.

Taking risks with translational research

The recent bankruptcy filing by deCODE, a company with an exceptional pedigree in associating genetic variance with disease onset, highlights the commercial risks of translational research. Indeed, deCODE's approach was similar to that adapted by academic researchers who seek to connect genetics and disease. We argue here that neither a purely corporate nor purely academic model is entirely appropriate for such research. Instead, we suggest that the private sector undertake the high-throughput elements of translational research, while the public sector and governments assume the role of providing long-term funding to develop gifted scientists with the confidence to attempt to use genetic data as a stepping stone to a truly mechanistic understanding of complex disease.