The pro-debtor and pro-creditor models – comparison of the effectiveness of bankruptcy law
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Research background: Bankruptcy in court proceedings has been of interest to researchers for many years. Researchers look for internal and external factors which influence the effectiveness and efficiency of bankruptcy proceedings; for example, the impact of the country’s level of development on the efficiency of bankruptcy proceedings, a system of incentives for the active participation of creditors in bankruptcy proceedings to increase their recovery rate, and mechanisms which encourage the early filing of an application for bankruptcy. Against the background of the research to date, a research gap was identified in the scope of the impact of the bankruptcy (pro-debtor/pro-creditor) law model on the effectiveness of the calculated recovery rate for creditors. The research fills a cognitive gap in New Institutional Economics by examining formal institutions in action, i.e. whether bankruptcy law meets its objectives in practice.
Purpose of the article: The aim of the article is to answer the question of which model answers the expectations of stakeholders – creditors who expect the highest possible rate of return. Poland is an example of a country where since 2016 there has been a change in the model of bankruptcy law from pro-creditor to pro-debtor.
Methods: The authors of the article conducted constant monitoring of the effectiveness of bankruptcy law in Poland through the examination of bankruptcy proceedings filed in bankruptcy and restructuring courts. The research on the efficiency of bankruptcy
proceedings was based on the analysis of files from bankruptcy proceedings conducted at the District Court in Warsaw. The analysis covered the period i) from 01.01.2004 to 31.12.2015 n=150 files of the pro-creditor model of bankruptcy proceedings and ii) from 01.01.2016 to 31.12.2019 n=66 files of the pro-debtor model of bankruptcy proceedings. The statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics Program Version 26. The Kruskal–Wallis H non-parametric test was employed.
Findings & Value added: The results of the research show that the new pro-debtor model of bankruptcy proceedings implemented in Poland after 31 December 2015 is less effective than the previous pro-creditor model of bankruptcy proceedings. In the pro-creditor model, creditors’ interests are managed more effectively. Practice shows that frequent changes in the law and model of bankruptcy law do not contribute to its effectiveness and efficiency. It seems that the stabilization of legal solutions is an important factor. The legal activity should be aimed at improving the solutions in force and their consolidation in the case law. Unfortunately, in Poland, entrepreneurs as well as citizens, due to its communist past, do not trust the legal system, formal institutions or other people (ESS 2020). For this reason, the pro-debtor model of bankruptcy proceedings may also have a negative impact on the development of Polish entrepreneurship in the future. To the best of our knowledge, no previous studies have made a comparison of the effectiveness of the pro-creditor and pro-debtor models of bankruptcy proceedings in a transition country such as Poland. Research data encompassing 16 years over the period of 2004–2019 used in the analysis is unprecedented in bankruptcy procedure studies in the post‑transition economies. Also, a set of indicators showing the effectiveness of bankruptcy proceedings employed in the research is unique.
Downloads
Article Details
The author of the article declares that the submitted article does not infringe the copyrights of third parties. The author agrees to subject the article to the review procedure and to make editorial changes. The author transfers, free of charge, to SGH Publishing House the author's economic rights to the work in the fields of exploitation listed in the Article 50 of the Act of 4 February 1994 on Copyright and Related Rights – provided that the work has been accepted for publication and published.
SGH Publishing House holds economic copyrights to all content of the journal. Placing the text of the article in a repository, on the author's home page or on any other page is allowed as long as it does not involve obtaining economic benefits, and the text will be provided with source information (including the title, year, number and internet address of the journal).
References
Adriaanse, J. A. A., Santen, B. P. A. & Wuisman, I. S. (2014b), European principles and best practices for insolvency office holders, Report II: A Comparative Analysis of Rules for Insolvency Office Holders in Eleven European Countries as a Means to Identify Room for Principles and Best Practices.
Altman, E. I., Rijken, H. A. (2011), Toward a bottom‐up approach to assessing sovereign default risk. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 23 (1), 20–31.
Altman, E. I. (1993), Corporate financial distress and bankruptcy. 2nd Edition, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
Armour, J. (2008), Codification and UK company law, in Association du Bicentenaire du Code de Commerce, ed., Bicentenaire du Code de Commerce 1807–2007: Les Actes des Colloques, 287–310. Paris: Dalloz.
Banasik, P., Morawska, S., Prusak, B., Woźniak – Jęchorek, B. (2019a), Sanctions and their role in preventing the appropriation of creditor’s property rights in bankruptcy proceedings – the theory of property rights. Economics and Business Review, Vol. 5 (19), No. 1, 93–113.
Banasik P., Kuczewska, J., Morawska, S., Prusak, B. (2019b), The role of stakeholders in cases where a debtor’s application for bankruptcy is rejected due to the ‘poverty’ of the insolvent estate – a case study from Poland, International Insolvency Law.
Blazy, R. Chopard, B., Fimayer, A., Guigoud, J.‑D. (2011), Employment preservation vs. creditors’repayment under BL: The French dilemma?. International Review of Law and Economics. 31 (2), 126–141.
Blazy, R., Boughanmi, A., Chopard, B., & Letaief, A. (2018a), Analyse économique du droit de la faillite: les dix fonctions des procédures collectives. Revue d’Economie Financière, no. 1, 117–160.
Blazy, R., Chopard, B., & Nigam, N. (2013), Building legal indexes to explain recovery rates: an analysis of the French and English bankruptcy codes. J Bank Financ, 37 (6), 1936–1959.
Blazy, R., Nigam, N. (2019), Corporate insolvency procedures in England: the uneasy case for liquidations. Eur J Law Econ, 47, 89–123.
Blazy, R., Petey, J., & Weill, L. (2018b), Serving the creditors after insolvency filings: from value creation to value distribution. Eur J Law Econ, 45 (2), 331–375.
Blazy, R., Stef, N. (2020), Bankruptcy procedures in the post-transition economies. Eur J Law Econ 50, 7–64.
Bris, A., Welch, I., Zhu, N. (2006), The Costs of Bankruptcy: Chapter 7 Liquidation versus Chapter 11 Reorganization. The Journal of Finance, 61 (3), 1253–1303.
Camacho-Miñano, M.‑M., Pascual-Ezama, D., & Urquía-Grande, E. (2013), On the efficiency of BL: empirical evidence in Spain. International Insolvency Review, 22 (3), 171–187.
Cepec, J. (2014), Corporate insolvency law – a necessity of market economy, lessons from history and Slovenia. Acta Histriae, 22 (3), 765–790.
Cepec, J., & Kovac, M. (2016), Carrots and sticks as incentive mechanisms for the optimal initiation of insolvency proceedings, DANUBE: Law, Economics and Social Issues Review, 7 (2), 79–103.
Cepec, J., Grajzl, P., (2020), Debt-to-equity conversion in bankruptcy reorganization and postbankruptcy firm survival. International Review of Law and Economics 61.
Claessens, S., Klapper, L. F. (2005), Bankruptcy around the world: Explanations of its relative use. American Law and Economics Review, 7 (1), 253–283.
Couwenberg, O., de Jong, A. (2008), Costs and recovery rates in the Dutch liquidation-based bankruptcy system. Eur J Law Econ, 26 (2), 105–127.
Danovi, A., Riva, P., Azzola, M. (2016), Avoiding bankruptcy in Italy: preventive arrangement with creditors. In S. Grima, F. Bezzina, I. Ramãnova, & R. Rupeika-Apoga (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Finance: Current Challenges from across Europe. Bingley: Emerald, 77–94.
Davydenko, S., & Franks, J. (2008), Do bankruptcy codes matter? A study of defaults in France, Germany, and the U. K. Journal of Finance, 63 (2), 565–608.
Djankov, S., Hart, O., Mc Liesh, C., & Shleifer, A. (2008), Debt enforcement around the World. Journal of Political Economy, 116 (6), 1105–1149.
Djankov, S., Hart, O., McLiesh, C., & Shleifer, A. (2008), Debt enforcement around the world.
Journal of Political Economy, 116 (6), 1105–1150. European Social Survey (2020).
Frouté, P. (2007), Theoretical foundation for a debtor friendly bankruptcy law in favour of creditors. Eur J Law Econ 24, 201–214.
García-Posada, M., & Mora-Sanguinetti, J. S. (2014), Are there alternatives to bankruptcy? A study of small business distress in Spain. SERIEs, 5 (2–3), 287–332.
Grunert, J., Weber, M. (2009), Recovery rates of commercial lending: Empirical evidence for German companies. J Bank Financ, 33 (3), 505–513.
Hart, O. (2006), Different approaches to bankruptcy, CESifo DICE Report, Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung an der Universität München, München, 4 (1), 3–8.
Jiang, W., Li, K., Wang, W., (2012), Hedge funds and chapter 11. Journal of Finance 67, 513–560.
Kaiser, K. (1996), European bankruptcy laws: implications for corporations facing financial distress, Financial Management, 25 (3), 461–484.
Kokorin, I. (2020), Conflicts of interest, intra‐group financing and procedural coordination of group insolvencies. Int Insolv Rev.; 29: 32–60.
Kruczalak-Jankowska, J., Maśnicka, M., Machnikowska, A. (2020), The relation between duration of insolvency proceedings and their efficiency (with a particular emphasis on Polish experiences). International Insolvency Review, 1–14.
Liu, X., Miao, M., Liu, R. (2020), Litigation and corporate risk taking: Evidence from Chinese listed _rms. International Review of Law and Economics 61, 105879. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818819300997
López Gutiérrez, C., García Olalla, M., Torre Olmo, B. (2009), The influence of bankruptcy law on equity value of financially distressed firms: a European comparative analysis. Int. Rev. Law Econ, 29 (3).
Marciano, A., Melcarne, A., Ramello, G. B. (2019), The economic importance of judicial institutions, their performance and the proper way to measure them. Journal of Institutional Economics 15, 81–98.
Mruk, E., Aguiar-Díaz, I., Ruiz-Mallorquí, M. V. (2019), Use of formal insolvency procedure and judicial efficiency in Spain. Eur J Law Econ 47, 435–470.
Ponticelli, J., & Alencar, L. S. (2016), Court enforcement, bank loans, and firm investment: Evidence from a bankruptcy reform in Brazil. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 131 (3), 1365–1413.
Ravid, S. A., Sundgren, S. (1998), The comparative efficiency of small-firm bankruptcies: a study of the US and Finnish bankruptcy codes. Financial Management. Financial Management Association, vol. 27 (4), Winter, 28–40.
Smrčka, L., Arltová, M. Schönfeld, J. (2017), Quality of insolvency proceedings in selected countries – analysis focused on recovery Rates, Costs and Duration. Administratie si Management Public, (28), 116–132.
Smrčka, L., Schönfeld, J., Arltová, M., Plaček, J. (2014), The significance of insolvency statistics and the regression analysis thereof – the example of the Czech Republic. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 11, 227–241.
Staszkiewicz, P., & Morawska, S. (2019), The efficiency of bankruptcy law: evidence of creditor protection in Poland. Eur J Law Econ, 48, 365–383. Sundgren, S. (1998), Does a Reorganization Law Improve the Efficiency of the Insolvency Law?
The Finnish Experience. Eur J Law Econ, 6, 177–198.
Thorburn, K. S. (2000), Bankruptcy auctions: costs, debt recovery, and firm survival. Journal of Financial Economics, 58 (3), 337–368.
Wessels, B. (2017), Cross-Border Insolvency Law in Europe: Present Status and Future Prospects. Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal, 11 (1), 67–102.