PulseExploreJournal ClubResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeJournal ClubExplore
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 24, 2026Business Law Review

The Complex Application of Article 11 of the Insolvency Directive and How the Cram Down Tool Has Been Transposed into the Italian and Romanian Legal Systems

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Authors

MSMarina SpiottaNNNicoleta Mirela NastasieAPAndrea Jonathan Pagano

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Explores the implementation of the cram-down tool in Italy and Romania, highlighting legal similarities and challenges.

Key Points

  • The study aims to analyze Article 11 of the Insolvency Directive and its implementation in Italy and Romania.
  • Examined case law and legislative texts from Italy and Romania.
  • Analyzed similarities and disparities in the implementation of cram-down tools.
  • Investigated procedural requirements and creditor protections.
  • Identified key differences in judicial discretion between the two countries.
  • Showed varying levels of creditor protection affecting restructuring outcomes.
  • Highlighting challenges in harmonizing insolvency laws across the EU.

Cite This Study

Spiotta et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/699d4008de8e28729cf64f55https://doi.org/10.54648/bula2026003
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Prudence lost? Recent judicial application of cramdown in China2026
  2. 2LIQUIDATION OF COMPANIES: ACCOUNTING, LEGAL AND FISCAL IMPLICATIONS IN THE CURRENT CONTEXT2025
  3. 3Optionality and EU Harmonization of Restructuring and Insolvency Law: The Case of the Preventive Restructuring Directive and Priority Rules2026 · 1 citations
  4. 4Efficiency-based rationales for notice of default and anticipated maturity in Romanian civil law2025
  5. 5International Insolvency Law and Corporate Groups2026