We investigate how the lockdown enforcement by French authorities is associated with the resolution of corporate insolvency. In this sense, we make a distinction between four legal procedures, namely the amicable liquidation (out-of-court exit), the judicial liquidation (court-driven exit), the restructuring procedure available to non-defaulted firms, and the restructuring procedure available to defaulted firms. Using a sample of 3488 non-listed and non-financial French firms, our estimates yield three major findings. First, the likelihood of judicial liquidation increased after the lifting of the quarantines compared to the pre-pandemic period. Second, the non-defaulted firms had a higher likelihood to reorganize in court during the second lockdown. Third, the lifting of the first lockdown led to a decrease in the probability of restructuring the assets of defaulted firms. Although the main objective of the lockdown was to limit spread of the virus, its enforcement has not encouraged the use of the out-of-court exit path.

我们调查法国当局的封锁执行与企业破产解决之间的关系。从这个意义上说，我们区分了四种法律程序，即友好清算（庭外退出）、司法清算（法院驱动退出）、非违约企业的重组程序和重组程序。可供违约公司使用。通过使用 3488 家非上市和非金融法国公司的样本，我们的估计得出了三个主要结果。首先，与疫情前相比，解除隔离后司法清算的可能性有所增加。其次，在第二次封锁期间，未违约的公司更有可能在法庭上进行重组。第三，第一次封锁的解除导致违约企业资产重组的可能性下降。尽管封锁的主要目的是限制病毒的传播，但其执行并没有鼓励使用庭外退出路径。