In 1895, writing in a Scottish
law journal, the doyen of
Dutch private international
law, Professor Josephus Jitta,
put forward three possibilities for
progress in the bankruptcy world.
The first was to have a world law,
passed by a federal parliament
assembled for that purpose,
although he considered this to be
an unattainable objective. The
second was the assimilation of
bankruptcy rules through the
elaboration of a common set of
rules to be adopted by domestic
legislators. This appeared to be a
more practical outcome, although
also seemingly difficult to achieve.
Lastly, he put the case for a treaty,
by which identical rules would be
inserted in the laws of state parties.
As to the contents of any such
treaty, he posited as the minimum
rules on jurisdiction (based on the
“centre of the business life” of the
debtor), publicity for proceedings,
transactional avoidance and
equality of creditors.1 His call for a
treaty has been answered in part
through the production of the
European Insolvency Regulation,
itself the successor to a treatybased
model, after a process that
endured over 30 years from when
the InsolvencyWorking Party was
first set up in the late 1960s. The
contents of the EIR differ
somewhat from Professor Jitta’s
list, although there are
recognisable elements in common.
Location