Explore the vast range of titles available.

The purpose of this book is to provide a coherent overview of the insolvency systems found around the world. Its intended audience includes academics, judges, lawyers, and policymakers. Its focus is on businesses rather than natural persons. The authors hope to give the reader a sense of some of the principal approaches to managing the general default of a business debtor. The authors will discuss the nature of the costs and benefits arising from the various policy choices legislators have made. In the process, they will emphasize the close interrelationship among various elements of an insolvency regime so that these elements can be viewed as part of an overall system and not just as a series of policy decisions about particular rules, such as the method of initiation of an insolvency case or the balance struck in setting the boundaries of an avoidance power. The organization of the book reflects our view of insolvency laws as complete systems, including not only the 'insolvency' or 'bankruptcy' code of a jurisdiction but also closely related laws and the institutional framework in which those laws are applied. The book takes a systematic approach to a variety of topics related to credit and insolvency regulation. The functional analysis starts with the study of debt enforcement, continues with an examination of general corporate insolvency legislation, corporate rehabilitation proceedings, informal workouts, employee rights, judicial and administrative institutions, and the considerations key to cross-border insolvency proceedings.

Automobiles are potentially dangerous, with tens of thousands killed in motor vehicle accidents (MVAs) and millions badly injured annually in the USA. Because of an inability for individual accident victims or those responsible for the accidents to pay for damages incurred, compulsory automobile insurance has been developed as a risk-distribution system. On the one hand, a danger is that insurers become less interested in the well-being of their claimants and more interested in maximizing their own profitability—denying any fiduciary obligation to anyone other than their shareholders. As a result, there are examples in which these companies fail to acknowledge valid psychological injuries in a manner that precludes survivors from accessing appropriate physical and mental health care. On the other hand, a danger is that claimants malinger, attribute pre-existing psychological problems to the event at issue, or otherwise feign. This analysis examines the literature on the importance of assessing validity and treating the psychological sequelae of automobile accidents. The authors conclude by calling for balance toward accident survivors with valid injuries (but only after vetting for feigning and related motivations), thereby ensuring that they receive adequate treatment that will ameliorate their suffering and allow them to regain reasonable qualities of life. That is, insurers should maintain the right to subject complainants to independent examinations, provided that the professionals involved apply the appropriate ethical standards in their assessments and in the interpretation of test results, toward establishing their valid needs for therapy. Such a change will require extensive use of psychologists and their knowledge of testing to determine the validity of potential claims of psychological injuries. This approach would not only be ethical on the part of insurers but it should also be cost-effective in the long run.

Clause 26 is the only clause in the agreement where the Arranger appears. At the time the loan agreement is signed, the Arranger’s task is completed and the main purpose of referring to the Arranger in this clause is to give them the benefit of the exclusion clause. However, given that the exclusion clause is effectively retrospective insofar as the Arranger is concerned1 this clause is no substitute for including an exclusion clause in appropriate pre-loan agreement documentation.

我國民法第128 條前段所定自「請求權可行使時」起算時效，要必權利人處於可行使請求權之狀態，亦即其行使請求權並無法律上障礙之客觀狀態，始足當之。消滅時效自請求權可行使時起算，是否處於可行使狀態，應就請求權性質判斷。德國民法於2002 年修正時就消滅時效相關規範做了調整，德國民法第199 條第1 項之規定類似我國民法第197 條第1 項所規定之消滅時效期間雙軌制。消滅時效制度之目的在維持法律之安定性及和平性。德國民法一般消滅時效的起算採客觀及主觀二個判斷基準，採取主觀之認定基準，以權利人知悉權利存在，作為認定消滅時效起算之基準，係重視權利人權益之保護。在消滅時效起算時點之基礎上，本文擬參考德國經驗，對消滅時效起算時點所生法律問題進行分析說明，並整理我國實務及學說見解，提供不同比較法視野，以供參酌。

This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Clarity Novelty Inventive Step Sufficiency of Disclosure Unity of Invention Patenting Strategy Notes References