Cross-border forum shopping for the benefit of a different insolvency law regime has become popular within the European Union in recent years. Yet legislators, courts and legal scholarship react with suspicion when debtors cross the border only to profit from a different insolvency law system. The most prominent legal tool, the European Insolvency Regulation, is based on the assumption that forum shopping is bad for the functioning of the European Internal Market.This paper questions the hostile attitude towards the phenomenon of forum shopping. It is argued that forum shopping can have beneficial effects both for the company and for its creditors, and that strong safeguards for creditors who oppose the migration are in place. Furthermore, the validity of the COMI approach of the Regulation under the fundamental freedoms of the Treaty is questioned; it is suggested that the current regime needs to be amended. The proposed new system would enable more corporate mobility within the European Union and create more legal certainty for all constituencies at the same time.

Freedom of establishment is one of the four fundamental freedoms of the European Union. The principle is that natural persons who are European Union Citizens, and legal entities formed in accordance with the law of a Member State and having its registered office, central administration or principal place of business within the EU, may take up economic activity in any Member State in a stable and continuous form regardless of nationality or mode of incorporation. This book examines the way in which EU law has influenced how national courts in Europe assert jurisdiction in cross-border corporate disputes and insolvencies, and the mechanism which allows them to decide which national law should apply to the substance of the dispute. The book also considers the potential for EU Member States to compete for devising national corporate and insolvency legislation that will attract incorporations or insolvencies. Central to the book is the concept of national choice of law. In considering the impact of freedom of establishment on private international law for corporations, the book uniquely analyses both corporate and insolvency law together, presenting the topic in the broadest possible sense. Importantly, the doctrine of abuse in corporate and insolvency law is covered, raising the question of 'forum shopping' and regulatory competition which underpins the intersection between freedom of establishment and private international law. Through examination of the most recent and leading judgments of the European Court of Justice in Centros and Cadbury Schweppes, the book derives certain conclusions as to the operation of the doctrine of abuse and the limits thereof in the context of freedom of establishment. Being the first in the field to examine the leading ECJ cases of Inspire Art, Sevic and Cartesio regarding the real seat doctrine, the book makes the judgment that there is no incompatibility as such between the doctrine and the freedom of establishment. Ultimately, the book analyses to what extent diversity in the corporate and insolvency laws of the Member States should be preserved, so as to encourage competition between jurisdictions in Europe.

"The new European Insolvency Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings) has come into effect on 26 June 2017 for insolvency proceedings that are opened on or after that date. The Recast Regulation reforms the EC Regulation (1346/2000) on insolvency proceedings. The main changes of the Regulation are: The extension of its application to preventive insolvency proceedings; The creation of publicly accessible online insolvency registers; The possibility of avoiding the opening of multiple proceedings and preventing 'forum shopping'; The introduction of new procedures with the aim of facilitating cross-border coordination and cooperation between multiple insolvency proceedings in different Member States relating to members of the same group of companies. In this book a team of experienced insolvency law experts, among them judges, insolvency practitioners and academics, analyse the European Insolvency Regulation article by article. The authors focus on the new provisions and mechanisms as well as on the existing, and to a great extent still relevant, case law by the European Court of Justice and courts of the Member States."--Bloomsbury Publishing.

One of the most contentious issues in cross-border insolvency is the 'forum shopping' phenomenon. The European Insolvency Regulation has set as one of its core objectives to avoid forum shopping. Nevertheless, the phenomenon continues to flourish due to the ability of a debtor to transfer its 'Centre of Main Interests'. This strategy has been creatively used by companies and over-indebted individuals in order to avail themselves of more advantageous insolvency regimes. Such practice, however, is viewed with suspicion by media and legal practitioners. This study questions the adverse reaction towards forum shopping. It argues that forum shopping is not always undesirable, but can also have beneficial effects when is undertaken with the consent of the stakeholders involved. It concludes that as long as disparities between insolvency laws exist the phenomenon is destined to endure.

The phenomenon of forum shopping in insolvency situations has long troubled policy makers and scholars alike. Forum shopping describes the situation where a debtor engages in regulatory arbitrage by modifying certain criteria that allow them to benefit from a different, more favourable insolvency law or jurisdiction. The European Insolvency Regulation, an instrument determining the competent courts and the applicable law in cross-border insolvency proceedings, has long sought to curb such efforts. A major reform adopted in 2015 has the specific objective of further restricting abusive versions of forum shopping, in particular by introducing a 'suspension period' for forum shopping activities carried out shortly before the debtor files for insolvency. This article demonstrates that these efforts fail to achieve a satisfactory response to forum shopping. Further, forum shopping with use of an English scheme of arrangement remains entirely outside the Regulation's scope.