CitationDownload as .RIS
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2008, Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Article Type: Editorial From: International Journal of Law and Management, Volume 50, Issue 2.
In this issue, we are pleased to be able to present a substantive study followed by two short opinion pieces. All the papers share the common theme of corporate finance.
In a comparative study Alexander Belohlavek examines the different approaches of European Union Members States' courts to the important practical issue of determining the debtor's centre of main interest in insolvency proceedings. The study combines an examination of emerging and conflicting jurisprudence with a consideration of the practical implications for legal and insolvency practitioners. Outwith the comments and contributions to an understanding of the practical application of European Law, Alexander's study also provides an insight into the conflicts between the continental European approach of the centre of operation approach and the Anglo Saxon mind of management approach. It is likely that the conflicts between these two different approaches will continue, and even be exaggerated beyond Europe, as corporate growth and failure extend to global affairs and to a global presence. It is often difficult to accommodate substantive works of this size but both the topic and the approach persuaded us that we should seek to share this with readers.
Vladimir Tyc returns to the fiscal and political challenges of the harmonisation of taxation in the European Union. Vladimir's views were first presented at an international conference at Voroneth University, Russia in September 2007. Those views have developed and present a valuable insight into the perceptions of academics in new Member States of the history and development of a common tax policy and how that policy might be progressed in the "new" Europe.
Finally, the emergence and growth of private equity holdings and influence on UK companies reached record levels of both press and political concerns in 2007. James Kirkbride provides an insight into the context for the levels of private equity growth, and reflects upon both the proposed tax changes and the limited self-regulatory response of the Walker recommendations.
We suspect that these three papers reflect on topics that will continue to attract attention and controversy. We hope that academic and practitioner reflection, and possibly dissatisfaction, will encourage further comment in the future.
James Kirkbride and Geraint Howells