The principal focus of modern insolvency legislation rests no longer on the liquidation and elimination of insolvent estates but on the remodeling of the financial and, if necessary, organizational structure of a debtor in economic difficulties so as to permit the continuation of the economic activities. Procedures for the conclusion of binding preventive accords with creditors, requiring approval by a qualified majority of them and confirmation by the courts, were provided by legislation in a number of countries during the second half of the 19th century. Economic crises during the 20th century gave rise to further legislative measures, providing a breathing spell for the debtor by means of a postponement or reduction of his liability, coupled if necessary with a change in ownership. Thus, a German law of 1916 provided for avoidance of bankruptcy and executions by a procedure placing the debtor, upon his petition, under judicially supervised management. Similar procedures were introduced subsequently into the companies acts of South Africa and Australia and incorporated into the English Insolvency Act, 1986, as a new avenue of relief for debtors threatened with insolvency (administration orders procedure). In addition, the laws of England, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand outline procedures for preventive composition and schemes of arrangement with creditors by companies or individual debtors. Procedures for preventive accords also exist in many civil-law countries—e.g., Austria, Germany, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Mexico. Italy has enacted special legislation for the extraordinary management of large enterprises in economic difficulties. Usually judicial compositions affect only the rights of unsecured creditors. Secured creditors must specifically and individually assent to any modification of their rights. In the case of corporate debtors, however, effective restoration of the viability of the enterprise may require much more drastic measures. Therefore, the United States, Japan, and, more recently, Argentina and Chile have enacted laws establishing procedures to permit the formulation and judicial confirmation of reorganization plans, the provisions of which may include elimination of ownership rights and significant curtailments of the rights of secured creditors. Austria reformed its composition act in 1982 by adding a preliminary procedure, resembling the old German management supervision order, to facilitate voluntary reorganization, especially refinancing. The most comprehensive legislation aimed at the salvage of distressed enterprises is the French insolvency legislation of 1985. This law provides a unified procedure establishing a mandatory period of observation to determine whether the insolvent enterprise can be rescued, if necessary at the expense of the owners and existing creditors, or whether liquidation is unavoidable.

Normally the existing bankruptcy laws do not differentiate between foreign and domestic creditors in proceedings involving the estates of residents, at least if reciprocity exists between the countries of the parties involved. Provisions to that effect exist in Germany and Japan and, by implication, in Italy. A number of Latin American countries, however, give priority to local creditors if there are concurring bankruptcies (simultaneous proceedings in more than one country) involving the same debtor. Equally controversial is the extraterritorial effect of releases resulting from compulsory compositions or discharges in bankruptcy.

Because of the difficulties arising from multiple bankruptcies or the principle of territoriality of bankruptcy legislation, some countries have regulated that subject among themselves by regional conventions. Among the Latin American countries are three treaties, binding different parties: the two treaties of Montevideo on International Terrestrial Commercial Law, concluded in 1889 and 1940, respectively, and the treaty of Havana on Private International Law (the so-called Bustamante Code) of 1928. The five Scandinavian countries concluded the Copenhagen Convention on bankruptcy on Nov. 7, 1933. In addition, there exist a number of bilateral treaties between different nations on the subject.

While the general aims and features of bankruptcy law in most countries are similar, substantive and procedural rules vary greatly. Modern reforms are treated in the following: (Argentina): Héctor Camara, El concurso preventivo y la quiebra: Commentario de la ley 19.551, 3 vol. (1978–82); and Enrique J.M. Erramuspe and Stella Maris Di Luca, Manual practico de concursos y quiebras, 2 vol. (1984). (Australia): A.N. Lewis, Lewis’s Australian Bankruptcy Law, 8th ed. by Dennis J. Rose (1984). (Austria): Richard Holzhammer, Österreichisches Insolvenzrecht: Konkurs und Ausgleich, 2nd rev. ed. (1983). (Brazil): Christino Almeida Do Valle, Teoria e Prática das Falências e Concordatas, 2nd ed. updated and enlarged (1985). (Canada): L.W. Houlden and C.H. Morawetz, Bankruptcy Law of Canada, 2 loose-leaf vol. (1984). (Chile): Alvaro Puelma Accorsi, Curso de derecho de quiebras, 3rd rev. ed. (1983). (England): Christopher Berry and Edward Bailey, Bankruptcy: Law and Practice (1987). (France): Fernand Derrida, Pierre Godé, and Jean-Pierre Sortais, Redressement et liquidation judiciaires des entreprises (1986). (East Germany): Horst Kellner (ed.), Zivilprozessrecht: Lehrbuch (1980). (West Germany): Ernst Jäger, Konkursordnung mit Einführungsgesetzen, 3 vol., 9th rev. ed. edited by Wolfram Henckel, Friedrich Weber, and Günther Jahr (1977–82); Georg Kuhn and Wilhelm Uhlenbruck, Konkursordnung: Kommentar, 10th rev. ed. (1986); and Bundesministerium der Justiz, Erster Bericht der Kommission für Insolvenzrecht (1985), and Zweiter Bericht der Kommission für Insolvenzrecht (1986). (India): Dinshah Fardunji Mulla, Mulla on the Law of Insolvency in India, 3rd ed. by D.S. Chopra (1977). (Italy): Domenico Mazzocca, Manuale de diritto fallimentare (1980); and Bartolomeo Quatraro, L’amministrazione straordinaria delle grandi emprese in crisi, 2 vol. (1985). (Japan): EHS Law Bulletin Series, vol. 2, no. 2340, Bankruptcy Law (Law No. 71), April 25, 1922 (1976), no. 2345, Composition Law (Law No. 72), April 25, 1922 (1975), no. 2346, Special Composition Law (Law No. 41), Oct. 18, 1946 (1975), and no. 2350, Corporate Reorganization Law (Law No. 172), June 7, 1952 (1983); and Mary E. Hiscock and Kazuaki Soo, “Security Interests and Insolvency in Japan,” Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht, 44:757–783 (1980). (Mexico): Joaquín Rodríguez Rodríguez (comp.), Ley de quiebras y de suspensión de pagos, 9th ed. rev. by José Víctor Rodríguez Del Castillo (1983). (New Zealand): F.C. Spratt, Spratt and McKenzie’s Law of Insolvency, 2nd ed. edited by P.D. McKenzie (1972). (Portugal): António Mota Salgado, Falência e Insolvência (1982). (South Africa): Walter Herbert Mars and Harold Edward Hockley, The Law of Insolvency in South Africa, 7th ed. by David Frobisher Waters and Richard Dennis Jooste (1980); Catherine Smith, The Law of Insolvency, 2nd ed. (1982); and David Shrand, The Law and Practice of Insolvency Winding-Up of Companies and Judicial Management, 3rd ed. (1977). (Spain): Francisco Ramos Méndez, Derecho procesal civil (1980), especially ch. 77, pp. 1175–1212; and Ministerio de Justicia, Secretaría General Técnica, Anteproyecto de ley concursal (1983). (Switzerland): Hans Fritzsche, Schuldbetreibung und Konkurs nach schweizerischem Recht, 3rd ed. edited by Hans Ulrich Walder-Bohner (1984– ). (United States): Lawrence P. King (ed.), Collier on Bankruptcy, 15th ed., 7 loose-leaf vol. (1979–87). (Venezuela): José Ramón Burgos Villasmil, La quiebra en el derecho venezolano (1985).