Airline insolvencies and environmental concerns: a comparative legal perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Airline insolvencies can be economically stressful for the countries concerned. One of the significant challenges associated with such insolvencies is the grounding of the aircraft over an extended period due to the pendency of the legal proceedings. The ease with which the lessors can regain possession of the aircraft, triggered by the default of the insolvency company, determines the efficacy of the regulatory climate. Leaving aside the financial troubles the insolvent company faces, it may be additionally expected to match its environmental obligations. Therefore, the push for ‘green insolvencies’ is slowly gaining momentum within the international community. The Cape Town Convention stipulates a sui generis process of seeking possession of an aircraft without undue delay. The countries incorporating the Convention into their domestic setups stand to gain a tremendous regulatory edge over those that are yet to align their national laws with this international instrument. While focusing on developing an efficient insolvency framework is not enough in light of the Sustainable Development Goals, it is possible to address environmental concerns by incorporating more climate-sensitive insolvency frameworks at the national level. The countries may continue to turn to their domestic environmental norms in this regard. This research study aims to throw light on how airline insolvencies need to be more considerate towards environmental interests. It seeks to fill the gaps in the current literature regarding this interface and explore this rather tenuous relationship from a comparative legal lens. The first section of the paper provides an overview of the study. The second section considers the applicability of the Cape Town Convention and discusses the relevant insolvency frameworks in the USA, the United Kingdom, Canada, India, and Nigeria. The last section of the study provides the concluding remarks and suggestions.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".