It was Lord Hoffmann who once spoke of a “golden thread” of modified universalism running throughout English Insolvency Law since the eighteenth century. However, after the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Rubin v Eurofinance SA, that golden thread seems to have lost its lustre. This paper critiques the main premise of the Rubin decision by questioning whether the Supreme Court was correct in holding that there can be no separate sui generis rule for recognising and enforcing foreign insolvency judgments. This article also explores the possible solutions, either through statute or the common law, that could be used to remedy the post-Rubin legal lacuna for recognising and enforcing foreign insolvency judgments.

霍夫曼勋爵曾经谈到自18世纪以来贯穿整个英国破产法的改良普遍主义的“金线”。但是，在英国最高法院在Rubin诉Eurofinance SA一案中作出判决后，这一金线似乎已经失去了吸引力。本文通过质疑最高法院是否认为没有单独的专门规则来承认和执行外国破产判决是否正确，从而对鲁宾裁决的主要前提提出了批评。本文还探讨了通过成文法或普通法的可能解决方案，这些解决方案可用于补救鲁宾会议后的法律空白，以承认和执行外国破产判决。