The enactments of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency and the European Regulations on insolvency proceedings have promoted an incremental approach towards substantive harmonization. This strategy has not remained unquestioned. One of the major criticisms is that such a course of actions overlooks the nature of the issues currently raised in multi-national and cross-disciplinary bankruptcy procedures.

This Article focuses on the Anglo/American bankruptcy tradition. It adopts a doctrinal methodology to question the conclusion that “collectivity” is and should be a procedural, objective, and secondary notion in light of two case studies. It suggests that in the context of cross-border, cross-disciplinary cases, equitable concepts could be employed to introduce a more nuanced understanding of the notion of “collectivity.” This should facilitate the recognition of foreign bankruptcy proceedings alongside with their inclusiveness, finality, and certainty.