论文部分内容阅读
随着经济全球化的发展,跨国破产案件逐渐增多。因破产制度自身和跨国企业自身的特殊性,跨国破产案件的管辖权目前主要归属于“主要利益中心地”法院。欧美国家在确定“主要利益中心地”时的具体方法不一样:欧盟侧重于以“商业活动”为因素来考量,美国则侧重于“控制、命令”方法来确定。虽然确定方法不同,但却存在着一致的问题:“利益”界定上“确定性”和“灵活性”存在冲突,这一问题是未来跨国企业破产案件必须解决的问题,对此应引进“意思自治原则”来保证“确定性”与“灵活性”的统一。
With the development of economic globalization, cross-border bankruptcy cases have been gradually increasing. Due to the particularity of the bankruptcy system itself and that of multinational corporations, the jurisdiction of transnational bankruptcy cases is mainly vested in the court of “center of main interests”. The specific methods adopted by the United States and Europe in determining the “center of main interests” are different: the EU focuses on the factor of “commercial activity” and the United States focuses on the “control and order” method. Although the methods of determination are different, there is a consistent problem: “Conflicts ” There is a conflict between “certainty ” and “flexibility ”, which is the problem that the transnational corporations must solve in the bankruptcy cases in the future, This should be the introduction of “principle of autonomy of meaning” to ensure the unity of “certainty” and “flexibility”.