MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410183499 · doi:10.1002/iir.1568

New legislation on restructuring in <scp>Bosnia and Herzegovina</scp>: A step forward?

2025· article· en· W4410183499 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dijana Marković‐Bajalović

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Insolvency Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEU Law and Policy Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestructuringLegislationBusinessComputer sciencePolitical scienceLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The legislative competence concerning insolvency in Bosnia and Herzegovina (‘BH’) lies with two entities – the Federation of BH and the Republic of Srpska – and the autonomous Brčko District. The reform of insolvency laws started 20 years ago and was influenced by new insolvency legislation in neighbouring countries. In recent years, BH insolvency laws have undergone major changes promoted by the World Bank and inspired by the European Union's activity on introducing measures aiming to prevent insolvency – Commission Recommendation 2014/135 on a new approach to a business failure and insolvency and Directive (EU) 2019/1023 on preventive restructuring and insolvency. The two BH entities and the Brčko District adopted new insolvency laws laying down the court's restructuring procedure. Besides, the Republic of Srpska enacted a special law on out‐of‐court financial restructuring. A debtor or a creditor can initiate restructuring in court in case of a debtor's imminent inability to pay debts. The restructuring procedure resembles the insolvency process, with the court managing the process within a strict timeline. The opening of the procedure activates the automatic stay of enforcement actions against the debtor. The court appoints a trustee among qualified insolvency administrators to list the debtor's property items and creditors' claims and control the debtor's operations by the end of the process. The role of creditors is minimised. They notify claims to the court and vote on a restructuring plan proposed by a debtor. BH laws fail to outline the scope of restructuring measures; they merely distinguish financial and operational restructuring. BH laws do not classify creditors according to the commonality of interests principle and consequently do not allow cram‐down across classes. Measures concerning early warning of creditors on the debtor's imminent inability to pay debts are missing in the laws. Provisions for special treatment of new financing are also lacking. Out‐of‐court restructuring is possible in BH within the framework of general contract law. Besides, the Republic of Srpska legislator made negotiations on voluntary out‐of‐court restructuring possible with the assistance of the Chamber of Commerce RS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.344 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Insolvency ReviewSame topicEU Law and Policy AnalysisFrench-language works237,207