Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 30, No. 3 (2002), pp. 393-442


It is not the purpose of this study to argue for or against changes in the secured credit or insolvency law of Argentina or the U.S. The perpetual clash of interested noted by James Madison and the contemporary pressures of the global economy are likely to assure that these areas of law will be subject to continuing scrutiny in both countries. Instead, we first urge that the law governing the creation and enforcement of security devices and the way in which insolvency laws impact these devices be considered together as part of one system of financing. The power which secured credit devices give to the creditor may be either checked or enhanced once the debtor files an insolvency proceeding. Second, by comparing how secured credit and insolvency law interact in Argentina and the U.S., we believe that it is possible to gain insight as to the core values and attitudes embodied in the present legal systems and a helpful viewpoint for evaluating proposed legal changes in either country. Comparison may even tend to free us from the ideological commitments which still seem to dominate discussion of the rights of debtors and creditors.