Misunderstanding the Model Law : Re Stanford International Bank

This article seeks to show that the English Court of Appeal’s refusal to recognize the US receivership in Re Stanford International Bank is not faithful to the Cross-Border Insolvency Regulations 2006 and the decision’s precedential value is seriously questionable. The Court of Appeal’s reasoning is contrary to statutory mandate, in particular Article 8 of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency. Further, the ‘centre of main interests’ test in Stanford unjustifiably diverges from that under Chapter 15 of the US Bankruptcy Code