While companies increasingly favour arbitration over litigation for dispute resolution, Macedonian Bankruptcy Law lacks explicit provisions addressing ongoing arbitrations when bankruptcy is declared. Creditors must register claims in bankruptcy proceedings, with litigation either staying or requiring continuation, yet arbitration’s treatment remains undefined.
This gap forces stakeholders to analogize arbitration to litigation, though inconsistencies arise, such as mandatory lawsuits in bankruptcy court for disputed claims. Elena highlights the clash between national insolvency frameworks and arbitration’s contractual autonomy, stressing the need for legislative reform to uphold party choice and creditor rights. Without clarity, creditors risk forfeiting claims, and inconsistent dispute resolution may undermine confidence in arbitration.
The article calls for urgent legal updates to align bankruptcy procedures with modern dispute-resolution trends, ensuring fairness and predictability in insolvency scenarios, underscoring that respecting arbitration agreements is vital to preserving contractual autonomy and fostering a stable business environment.
