Revista EMERJ 74 EMPRESARIAL ONLINE

38 / 210

 R. EMERJ, Rio de Janeiro, v. 19, n. 74, p. 9 - 65. 2016  36
quired rights … [in order to] achieve that objective, flexibility
and pragmatism must be substituted for the dogmas so be-
loved of former ages. This entails a vital role for the judges
within each State concerned, since it is only through their ac-
tivism and initiative that the system can respond to the par-
ticular challenges posed by the circumstances of a live case". 72
Por outro lado, o professor norte-americano Jay Lawrence West-
brook foi responsável por criar um sistema intermediário de grande in-
fluência, tendo recebido atenção mundial. A delimitação de sua teoria se
deu em 199173, sendo progressivamente desenvolvida ao longo do tempo.
O sistema recebeu o nome de universalismo modificado (modified univer-
salism), sendo por vezes retratado também como universalidade mensu-
rada (measured universality).
Semelhantemente às ideias de Ian Fletcher, o modelo de Jay La-
wrence Westbrook prevê uma pluralidade de processos falimentares ao
redor do globo, regidos por diversas leis, que devem atuar cooperativa-
mente, semelhantemente a um mecanismo universal voltado para distri-
buir simetricamente os valores neles tratados. Em outros termos, essa
atuação cooperativa precisa atingir os mesmos resultados que um único
processo transnacional atingiria. O professor norte-americano, no entan-
to, ressalta que a opção pelo universalismo modificado deve servir apenas
como uma medida de transição para a adoção de um verdadeiro (puro)
universalismo no mundo74 .
72 FLETCHER, Ian F. Insolvency In Private International Law…, §1.19 apud WESSELS; Bob; MARKELL, Bruce A.; KIL-
BORN, Jason J. International Cooperation in Bankruptcy…, p. 70.
73 O professor norte-americano traçou os primeiros contornos de sua teoria em um artigo que visava lidar com a es-
colha da avoidance law nos casos de insolvência globais: “This Article is about one important aspect of transnational
bankruptcy, the avoidance of prebankruptcy transactions. When a multinational enters bankruptcy proceedings in
its home country, it will nearly always have engaged in prebankruptcy transactions having substantial contacts with
two or more nations. Every other party to each of those transactions may be a defendant in an avoidance action
brought by the Trustee in Bankruptcy (TIB) in an “avoiding” court, which is a court in a nation that is not the home
country of the multinational, but which has substantial contacts with the transactions and has jurisdiction over
an avoidance defendant. The avoiding court must choose which avoidance law to apply. This Article discussed the
most common and simplest case in which the choices are two: (1) local (avoiding court) law; or (2) home-country
(domiciliary) law” (WESTBROOK, Jay Lawrence. Choice of Avoidance Law in Global Insolvencies. Brooklyn Journal
of International Law, v. 17, p. 499. Disponível em: /
bjil17&div=30&id=&page=>. Acesso em 16.05.2016). A definição do termo avoidance é fornecida pelo citado pro-
fessor na nota de rodapé de nº 2: “‘Avoidance’ of a transaction refers to: (1) a judicial order requiring the return
of certain property transferred by a debtor; (2) the canceling of certain obligations incurred by a debtor; or (3) the
award of a monetary judgment against the beneficiary of a transaction in the amount of the benefit received.”
74 “I am convinced that modified universalism is the best transitional rule, because it moves us in the right direc-
tion--toward true universalism—and provides the essential experience to inform the fashioning of a multinational
bankruptcy convention when that time comes. It also permits flexible, pragmatic decisions to be made in the here
and now that enables parties to obtain some portion of the benefits of universalism”. WESTBROOK, Jay Lawrence.
A Global Solution…, p. 2329.