Creditors and the insolvent firm are required to use the state supplied bankruptcy procedure if they cannot agree on a private resolution after financial distress has occurred. While these ex post workouts are legal, parties cannot agree in the lending contracts to use a bankruptcy procedure alternative to the one the state supplies. This paper considers this legal prohibition. The paper makes three principal claims: the prohibition on contracting for preferred bankruptcy procedures exacerbates underinvestment; the prohibition should be lifted for this reason and because parties could coordinate on "bankruptcy contracts" although firms tend to have numerous creditors, who lend at different times and may have different preferences over procedures; and methodologically, that regulators should take the ability of parties to contract about bankruptcy issues into account when devising legal rules.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Find related papers by JEL classification: K12 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Contract Law G33 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Bankruptcy; Liquidation
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)