On the control of the administration of insolvency proceedings in the context of trends in the development of bankruptcy of enterprises

Using the example of provisions of Federal Law No. 127-FZ “On Insolvency (Bankruptcy)” and Draft Law No.1172553-7, as well as provisions of foreign legislation (France, USA) and doctrine and judicial practice, the author considers control of the administration of insolvency proceedings in the context of the trends in insolvency development. Along the way, corporate control becomes a subject of attention. The author starts with a subjective-objective approach to the world, using the dialectical method and other general and specific scientific methods such as comparative and historical analysis, synthesis and others. The result of the work, among other things, is the conclusion that a pro-debtor approach in insolvency (bankruptcy) law, which focuses on saving the debtors' businesses, and not just on satisfying creditors' demands, echoes which we can see from time to time in court decisions, in our opinion, requires a radical rethink of the classical understanding of bankruptcy management and the role of arbitration administrators and other participants in bankruptcy proceedings. The priorities of the control of the administration of insolvency proceedings should shift away from a credit-centric model where the main goal is to satisfy creditors as quickly as possible through liquidation. Such a control should become an instrument for achieving a balance of interests. The role of the arbitration manager (AM) needs to be transformed from a creditor-oriented role, when the arbitration manager is primarily seen as an agent for the creditors' meetings, fulfilling the wishes of these meetings to maximize current payments by reducing its task to inventorying property, valuing it and selling it, to understanding AM as a crisis manager/restructurer. This requires: 1) a revision of the authority of the arbitrator, who is severely limited in his ability to save a business without approval from the creditors meeting in terms of expansion, 2) moving the “risk zone” for AM, where its main risk is the dissatisfaction of the creditors due to insufficient payments, and 3) an increase in the role of courts, etc. Practical examples of applying this approach are shown. Legislation amendments, including those based on international experience, are suggested.