At this stage of the survey, it might be helpful to pause for a moment and to summarise the conclusions which have been reached so far. This shall be done in four steps: first, the question can now be answered as to whether there are principles of cross-border insolvency law at all; second, the assumption that principles can be sorted into groups must be addressed; third, the relationship between the principles identified so far must be discussed; and fourth, a brief review of the cross-border insolvency laws already evaluated in this book is due.

PRINCIPLES

A first preliminary thesis of the book concerned the existence of foundational principles to which many rules regulating issues of cross-border insolvency proceedings can be traced back, these principles being defined as fundamental and basic standards underlying international insolvency law and systemising the law as well as legitimising the legal consequences of these rules. Up until now, the survey has proved this thesis to be correct; it has been shown that not only the European Insolvency Regulation but also almost all (binding and soft) laws on cross-border insolvencies considered in this book are based on fundamental tenets which they purport to enforce. Many concrete norms can be ascribed to certain principles; these principles are not only enforced by these norms but also legitimise the legal consequences of the norms with regard to the specific issues regulated by them. Principles are also important when it comes to the construction of norms, since a principle-based approach has been shown to facilitate the application of provisions of international insolvency laws in controversial cross-border cases.

GROUPS OF PRINCIPLES

A second preliminary thesis of the book was that it would be possible to categorise principles into certain groups while systemising and contextualising them. This has turned out to be not only feasible but also a helpful approach. Principles address various aspects of cross-border insolvency law. Some deal primarily with the relationship between sovereign states affected by the proceedings and can therefore be assigned to a group which has been labelled here as ‘jurisdictional principles’. Others concern the procedural aspects of cross-border insolvencies and are thus pooled in a second group covering ‘procedural principles’.