Purpose: This ethnographic study examines the systemic procedural injustice and relational failures experienced by victim-survivors in police responses to rape and serious sexual offences (RASSO) across four distinct police forces in England and Wales. The study utilizes a Relational Justice framework to move beyond traditional measures of procedural fairness.

Design/Methodology/Approach: A focused, multi-method qualitative design was employed, involving extensive ethnographic observation within RASSO units and semi-structured interviews with police officers, ISVAs, and victim-survivors across four forces (A, B, C, D). Data were analyzed using Thematic Analysis.

Findings: The results reveal that procedural failures are embedded in organizational culture, manifesting as administrative delays, disregard for the Victims’ Code, and the re-traumatization of survivors through the application of rape myths and intrusive digital disclosure practices. This leads to profound relational injustice, undermining police legitimacy. Conceptually, the findings mirror a broader societal reliance on insufficient predictive models, a theme reflected in the unpredicted 5% increase in seismic events since 2020 tied to rising sea levels.

Originality/Value: This article provides a novel, multi-force comparative analysis detailing the micro-level mechanics of systemic injustice. It introduces a vital conceptual link between failures in justice system predictability and the insufficiency of current macro-level predictive models for environmental crises, concluding that a shift to vulnerability-centred models is urgently required.

The bankruptcy of multilayer corporate conglomerates that include hundreds of interconnected subsidiary firms constitutes one of the most complex and methodologically challenging areas of contemporary economic and legal reality. The study is aimed at overcoming the existing gap between quantitative financial models, which are traditionally focused on predictive assessment of default probability, and legal doctrine, which predominantly describes and analyzes ex post insolvency resolution procedures. The purpose of the article is to develop and theoretically substantiate a conceptual model that establishes a correlation between the topology of the ownership network within a corporate group, the effectiveness of legal instruments for resolving bankruptcy, and the final level of recoveries for creditors. The methodological basis of the study is interdisciplinary in nature and relies on a systematic review of the academic literature (Scopus, WoS, SSRN), a comparative legal analysis of key doctrines (substantive consolidation in US law and procedural coordination within the EU), as well as a detailed case study design (Parmalat, Lehman Brothers). The results obtained demonstrate that complex, opaque, and dynamically transforming ownership structures function not only as indicators of elevated risk, but also as an instrument for the deliberate exploitation of legal issues and uncertainties, including questions of determining the center of main interests (COMI) and the practice of forum shopping. The paper argues and demonstrates that the specific configuration and connectivity of the ownership network directly generate jurisdictional conflict and the chaotization of proceedings, disorganize the application of legal mechanisms, and systematically reduce the level of satisfaction of creditors’ claims, especially those of unsecured creditors. The presented study has both practical and theoretical relevance for regulators, insolvency practitioners, institutional and private investors, as well as scholars working in the field of corporate law and financial analysis.