The thesis of this book is that cross-border insolvency rules of all kinds (e.g. the European Insolvency Regulation, the UNCITRAL Model Law, the ALI Principles for the NAFTA states, national laws such as Chapter 15 US Bankruptcy Code and Sch.1 Cross-Border Insolvency Regulation 2006) are founded on, and can be traced back to, basic values, and that they aim to pursue and enforce such principles. Furthermore, several principles can be identified, distinguished and then sorted into three groups: jurisdictional principles (e.g. unity, universality, equality, mutual trust, cooperation and communication, subsidiarity, proportionality), procedural principles (e.g. efficiency, transparency, predictability, procedural justice, priority) and substantive principles (e.g. equal treatment of creditors, optimal realisation of the debtor's assets, debtor protection, protection of trust [for secured creditors and contractual partners, amongst others], social protection [for employees and tenants et al]). If this thesis is correct, it might be helpful for both deciding cases and shaping crossborder insolvency law through the use of a principle-based approach. Legislators as well as judges could be offered new substantive and methodological support in making decisions, e.g. where the treatment of secured creditors, support for foreign insolvency practitioners or even harmonisation of cross-border insolvency laws is at stake.

Some of my theses and proposals – for example that the fate of rights in rem should be governed by the lex fori concursus – may seem provocative to many readers. If ‘provocative ’ is used in the sense of ‘thought-provoking ’, then I am very happy with this assessment. In the field of cross-border insolvency law, academic thinking must not become jaded. It is hoped that putting the principlebased approach developed in this book up for discussion may contribute to an open-minded and fertile discourse on how to improve the laws on international insolvency proceedings.

Furthermore, this is not a political book. It does not aim for ‘conservative ’ or'socialist ’ solutions, and it does not seek to make the legal world a better place. It simply tries to offer a methodological proposal on how to serve the needs of a global market for harmonised (cross-border) insolvency laws in an economically reasonable and hopefully acceptable way.