This essay is questioning if the state as an unsecured creditor in a bankruptcy proceeding, according to the principle of equal treatment, has the same rights as the other unsecured creditors. The principle of equal treatment means that creditors with unsecured claims are supposed to have mutually equal rights to dividends in a bankruptcy. In the Swedish bankruptcy law from 1987 there are recycling rules which means that some legal actions taken by the bankrupt debtor before the bankruptcy can be recycled to the bankruptcy estate. These rules do not apply on taxes. This essay analyzes whether the state should have this advantage or not. Another issue that’s discussed in this essay is whether or not the opinion of the Court of Appeal that a right of recourse on a claim for a paid Governmental wage guarantee exists before a bankruptcy should be established by the Supreme Court. This essay also analyzes if the rule which statutes that a company representative can become personally liable for the company tax debts should be abolished or not, since this rule means that the taxes on a larger scale than other claims are paid before the bankruptcy.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:oru-21060 |
| Date | January 2011 |
| Creators | Schöllin, Mari-Helen |
| Publisher | Örebro universitet, Akademin för juridik, psykologi och socialt arbete |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0024 seconds