众所周知,采矿业面临着艰难的局面。在最近几年的市场繁荣时期,矿业公司承担了空前庞大的债务。目前,随着商品价格的下降和再融资来源的枯竭,这些巨额的债务令许多公司步履维艰,严重威胁着它们的生存。
加拿大
若无法与债权人商定业务解决方案,公司应该考虑向债权人寻求破产法项下的保护。在加拿大拥有资产或在加拿大经营业务且债务金额在五百万以上的公司可获得联邦《公司债权人安排法》(简称,“CCAA”)项下的保护。
CCAA允许公司在重组公司事务时暂缓债权人追诉,同时根据某些条件维持对公司经营的控制。公司,特别是未达到五百万债务门槛的公司,还可以考虑联邦《破产法》项下的和解机制。在本文中,我们将讨论CCAA项下的程序。
CCAA项下程序的第一步是获得法院命令,该命令将暂缓债权人在三十日的初始期限内行使其权利,从而允许公司制定重组方案。在获得首个暂缓命令前,公司无需通知债权人,尽管在许多情况下,建议公司通知其债权人。
若公司能够证明其很有可能将提交重组方案,并且延期不会有损于债权人的整体利益,暂缓命令的期限还可以延长。下达暂缓命令时,法院还将任命独立第三方在命令生效期间,监控公司业务及财务事宜。监控人须向法院报告公司的业务行为,但并不管理或指导公司业务。
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.
On July 28, 2021, the Supreme Court of Canada (the "SCC") released its decision in Canada v Canada North Group Inc.[1] (2021 SCC 30) confirming that court-ordered super-priority charges ("Priming Charges") granted pursuant to the Companies' Creditors Arrang
A strata wind-up is an excellent way to realize the economic potential of a multi-unit residential property ("strata") by leveraging the value of each strata unit in the strata as a whole to a developer that may want to develop on the strata's property. However, the wind-up process is complex, involving the intersection of real estate, condominium law ("strata property law"), and the law of restructuring.
Winding up of a strata corporation
In the second of our mini-series on insolvency in construction, we consider what you need to do when you find out that the party you are in contract with has become (or is about to become) insolvent.
Who are you in contract with? Which specific entity?
The first thing you should do in the event of a counterparty's alleged insolvency is check which legal entity you are in a contract with.
This is in order to prevent you from acting too early and committing a repudiatory breach yourself, if you take pre-emptive action against your counterparty.
APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL DISMISSED
37268
Joseph Palazzo v. Standard Life Assurance Company of Canada
(Que.)
Civil Procedure – Appeal – Prescription
The Applicant was an employee of the Respondent from 1968 to 2009. In 1980, the Applicant began selling life insurance and investment products of the Respondent until his retirement on May 1, 2009. During his employment as a sales representative, the Applicant was paid on a commission basis only.
36238 Her Majesty the Queen v. Erin Lee MacDonald (Charter of Rights – Mandatory minimum sentences – Cruel and unusual punishment – Criminal law – Sentencing)
If Peter Morton and Cinitel Corp. had their way, every lender would have a distinct duty to a guarantor to permit the sale of a defaulting borrower’s assets as a going concern. In their view, a lender should be required to maximize its recovery from the borrower and to minimize any claim made on a guarantee. Fulfilling that duty would also obligate a lender to keep funding a borrower while that asset sale was negotiated and completed. It is enough to make any lender cringe.
Fortunately, the Ontario Court of Appeal disagreed with Morton and Cinitel’s view of the lending world.
Many describe the United States as Canada's most important trade partner. Cross-border insolvency proceedings between the two jurisdictions are frequent and the recognition by one country's court of the other's bankruptcy orders is an important tool in facilitating the restructuring of companies with operations that spread across North America. A recent decision from the Ontario Court of Appeal (leave to appeal of which was denied by the Supreme Court of Canada) invites us to reflect on the delicate balance between comity for foreign orders and Canada's sovereignty over domestic laws.
Two priority issues arise between creditors of a common debtor: