Unqualified Directors in Insolvency: A Comparative Study on the Desirability of Civil Law Directors' Disqualification in the Netherlands
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The current global economic, and therefore political, climate has given rise to legislative responses within insolvency law, aiming to increase the legal arsenal against fraudulent behaviour. A recent proposal of the Dutch government to introduce a civil law disqualification instrument is a quintessential example of this tendency. In this article, the usefulness of this proposal is questioned. The usefulness of the civil law instrument is tested by comparing it with its Dutch criminal law equivalent. Furthermore, several proposals for alteration, based on foreign counterparts, will be formulated in order to increase the effectiveness of the aforementioned arsenal as a whole. Comparisons are made with similar instruments in Australia, England, Germany and the USA. Throughout the article, it will be asserted that, in order for the proposal to optimally reflect the principles of effectiveness and its civil law nature, a reallocation of certain elements of the proposal to its criminal law equivalent is required. Copyright © 2014 INSOL International and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it