中国应否采纳《跨境破产示范法》之研究——韩进海运破产引发的思考  

A reconsideration on adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency in China triggered by the bankruptcy of Hanjin Shipping

作　　者：李珠 胡正良[1] LI Zhu;HU Zheng-liang(School of Law,Shanghai Maritime University,Shanghai 201306,China)

机构地区：[1]上海海事大学法学院

出　　处：《中国海商法研究》2019年第2期68-80,共13页Chinese Journal of Maritime Law

基　　金：国家社科基金后期资助项目“《海商法》修改基本理论与主要制度研究”(16FFX010)

摘　　要：在介绍跨境破产相关定义和《跨境破产示范法》(简称《示范法》)的基础上,分析《示范法》颁布国与非颁布国针对韩进海运破产事件采取的具体措施,引出中国是否应当采纳《示范法》的思考。基于博弈论的分析范式,从定量和定性的角度分析中国采纳《示范法》的利弊,并通过模型和分析得出中国现阶段采纳《示范法》不利于中国整体经济利益和债权人利益保护的结论,同时提出以根植本国国情为前提,借鉴《示范法》的先进内容,完善《中华人民共和国企业破产法》中跨境破产法律制度的建议。Based on the concept of cross-border insolvency, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency and the case of Hanjin Shipping bankruptcy, this article analyzes whether China should adopt the Model Law and how to improve the legal regime on cross-border insolvency in the Chinese law. The pros and cons of China’s adoption of the Model Law are evaluated from the quantitative and qualitative aspects with the idea of game theory. The findings show that currently China should not adopt the Model Law as it is not conducive to its overall economic interests and the protection of domestic creditors. Meantime, it is concluded that China should improve the cross-border insolvency legal regime in its Enterprise Bankruptcy Law by reference to the advanced contents of the Modal Law in the premise of China’s reality.

关 键 词：跨境破产 《跨境破产示范法》 博弈论 

分 类 号：D996.19[政治法律—经济法学]