Key points
When deciding whether to grant an order that administrators may sell secured assets as if they are not subject to security the court will:
I. Introduction
This article has been contributed to the blog by Patrick Riesterer. Patrick Riesterer is an associate in the insolvency and restructuring group of Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP.
NORTH OF THE BORDER UPDATE
What does the U.S. doctrine of equitable subordination have to do with Canada? Superficially, the answer may be: not much. But for many financing and insolvency professionals here in Canada, there remains a palpable sense that the U.S. doctrine will eventually, if not inevitably, find its way fully across the U.S. border into Canada. So, perhaps the more appropriate response really ought to be: not much, at least not yet! It is because of this anticipation that it is worthwhile, from time to time, to summarize the central aspects of the U.S.
Derivatives market participants will want to pay close attention to Industry Canada’s recent discussion paper regarding its review of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and
The British Columbia Court of Appeal recently released a helpful decision applying principles of discoverability to determine when a limitation period begins to run. In Roberts v. E.
Enhancing lender priority over pension deficiencies in Canada in the post Indalex era - more guidance from the courts
Three recent cases address open issues from the 2013 Indalex decision and point the way to strategies to limit financier exposure to pension deficiency priority
In the last few years, pension deemed trust issues have been a subject of debate before the courts.
Bankruptcy trustees should clearly communicate to the bankrupt their intent to make a claim against the non-exempt equity in the bankrupt's property at the time of the assignment into bankruptcy, according to the recent decision of the British Columbia Supreme Court in Re Barter.1 A failure to communicate such an intent may result in the trustee being unable to realize the non-exempt equity or, as in Re Barter, the absolute discharge
On December 19, 2013, the Ontario Court of Appeal held that the Registrar of Motor Vehicles (the “RMV”) cannot deny vehicle permits to individuals on account of pre- bankruptcy debts owing to the ETR Concession Company Limited (the “ETR”). Based on the intent and purpose of federal bankruptcy law to permit debtors to obtain a “fresh start,” it was concluded that the provincial act establishing the ETR conflicts with bankruptcy law and was, as a result, unconstitutional in part.
Background