Fulltext Search
Corporate minds do not all think alike: The Supreme Court affirms a purposive approach to the corporate attribution doctrine

Two recent Supreme Court of Canada decisions demonstrate that the corporate attribution doctrine is not a one-size-fits-all approach.

Canada, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, Supreme Court of Canada
There’s Something About (Hail) Mary: Appeals of Sale Processes and Pre-Receivership Sale Agreements

Court approval of a sale process in receivership or Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”) proposal proceedings is generally a procedural order and objectors do not have an appeal as of right; they must seek leave and meet a high test in order obtain it. However, in Peakhill Capital Inc. v.

Canada, Ontario, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McCarthy Tétrault LLP
California court clarifies directors’ duties when a corporation is insolvent or in the zone of insolvency

On October 29, 2009, the California Court of Appeal, Sixth District, in Berg & Berg Enterprises, LLC v. Boyle, et al., unequivocally ruled that, under California law, directors of either an insolvent corporation or a corporation in the more elusively defined “zone of insolvency” do not owe a fiduciary duty of care or loyalty to creditors. In so ruling, California joins Delaware in clarifying directors’ duties when the corporation is insolvent or in the zone of insolvency.

Background

USA, California, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McDermott Will & Emery, Shareholder, Breach of contract, Fiduciary, Board of directors, Good faith, Duty of care, Delaware Court of Chancery, California courts of appeal, US District Court for Northern District of California