This research aims at establishing the adequacy (or not), of the statutory framework available for business funding in the UK during corporate rescue, by undertaking a comparison between relevant laws in the UK, Canada and the United States of America. The thesis evaluates if the UK's provision for funding mirrors the functions of the well-established rescue funding structures found in Canada and the United States of America. The study begins with a historical analysis of the development of bankruptcy laws in order to establish the context within which a rescue culture developed within the comparator jurisdictions. It identifies a shift of focus from outright liquidation of companies to the rescue of parts or the whole of a distressed company. This forms the milieu within which the study undertakes an examination of statutory provisions for business funding. It explores both the formal and informal frameworks available for funding and does this by an in-depth comparative analysis of the theoretical and contextual factors responsible for the development of divergent rescue funding procedures. The research identifies the differences and similarities between the relevant laws of the three countries and attempts to identify a possible functionally equivalent solution to the common issue of funding rescues with the aim of ascertaining whether there are any weaknesses to the present statutory provisions for business funding in the UK and, if so, how they may be addressed.