Bruckmueller, M., and Struc, L., 2014, “Slovenia”, in Hoeni/Hammerl (eds.), Insolvency and Restructuring law in Central & Eastern Europe, Vienna.
CEPEJ (Council of Europe), 2014, Report on European Judicial Systems: Efficiency and Quality of Justice, http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/cepej/evaluation/2014/Rapport_2014_en.pdf
Damijan, J. P, May 2014, “Corporate Financial Soundness and its Impact on Firm Performance: Implications for Corporate Debt Restructuring in Slovenia”, EBRD, Working Paper No. 168.
Ermenova, M., Liu, Y., and Saxegaard, M., 2011, “Corporate and Household Debt Distress in Latvia: Strengthening the Incentives for a Market-based Approach to Debt Resolution” IMF Working Paper, WP/11/85.
EBRD, 2014, Assessment of Insolvency Office Holders, http://assessment.ebrd.com/insolvency-office-holders/2014/report.html
European Commission, 2014, Commission Recommendation on a New Approach to Business Failure and Insolvency (12.3.2014), C (2014) 1500 final, http://ec.europa.eu/justice/civil/files/c_2014_1500_en.pdf
European Commission, 2014, Impact Assessment Accompanying the Document. Commission Recommendation on a New Approach to Business Failure and Insolvency, http://ec.europa.eu/justice/civil/files/swd_2014_61_en.pdf
INSOL Europe, 2014, Study on a New Approach to Business Failure and Insolvency – Comparative Legal Analysis of the Member States’ Relevant Provisions and Practices, http://ec.europa.eu/justice/civil/files/insol_europe_report_2014_annexes_en.pdf
Liu, Y. and Rosenberg, C., 2013, “Dealing with Private Debt Distress in the Wake of the European Financial Crisis: A Review of the Economics and Legal Toolbox,” IMF Working Paper WP/13/44.
Westbrook, J.L., Booth, C. D., Paulus, C. G., and Rajak, 2010, H., A Global View of Business Insolvency Systems, The World Bank, Washington DC.
Prepared by José M. Garrido (LEG).
On the role of insolvency procedures in addressing the problems of debt distress, both by direct application and also as a backdrop for out-of-court negotiation, see generally UNCITRAL, Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law, p. 22; IMF, Orderly & Effective Insolvency Procedures, Secc.2; World Bank, Principles for effective Insolvency and Creditor/Debtor Regimes, Principle B3.6;. On the relationship between formal insolvency frameworks and out-of-court restructuring, see Hagan, “Restructuring Corporate Debt in the Context of a Systemic Crisis”; Laryea, “Approaches to Corporate Debt Restructuring in the Wake of Financial Crises,” Garrido, Out-of-court debt restructuring.
Approval of insolvency plans by classes of creditors is considered best international practice: see UNCITRAL Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law, p. 218. It is the system followed by most of the advanced economies, including the USA, Japan, and Germany.
“When coupled with rights of appeal and the difficulties associated with processing types of claim requiring valuation, the complexity of the process has the potential to significantly interrupt the conduct of the proceedings and cause delay that will affect other steps in the proceedings. For these reasons, it is highly desirable that formalities be minimized and that decision-making be as streamlined as possible” (UNCITRAL Legislative Guide on Insolvency Law, p. 257).
The remarkable increase in personal bankruptcies seems to be connected to a change of rules of procedure that exempts the petitioner from advancing the costs of the procedure.
See Damijan, J. P. “Corporate financial soundness and its impact on firm performance: Implications for corporate debt restructuring in Slovenia”,
See the list of insolvency administrators at www.ajpes.si (website of the Agency of the Republic of Slovenia for Public Legal Records and Related Services).