Fulltext Search
Chambre de la sécurité financière v. Thibault 2016 QCCA 1691

Does a fine imposed on a debtor by the disciplinary committee of the Chambre de la sécurité financière after the date of the debtor's bankruptcy constitute a provable claim pursuant to section 121(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (the "BIA")?

Introduction

Canada, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy discharge, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act 1985 (Canada)
The oppression remedy and fulfilment of directors’ duties

In Susi v. Bourke, 2014 O.J. No. 11

A Summary

In Susi v. Bourke, [2014] OJ No 11, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice held that when all of the directors of a corporation fail to comply with their fiduciary duties, none of them can seek a remedy for oppression.

Canada, Ontario, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Borden Ladner Gervais LLP, Conflict of interest, Bankruptcy, Fiduciary
Debtor in possession financing – what is it, who needs it and how did it jump the queue?

Debtor in Possession (“DIP”) financing is essentially new bridge financing that is provided to a corporation as it undergoes insolvency proceedings. The term exists because the corporation maintains possession of its assets during this process as opposed to having a bankruptcy trustee take possession. The concept derived from the United States of America where DIP financing is expressly provided for under c.11 of the Bankruptcy Code and allows a bankrupt corporation to incur new debt for the purposes of carrying on business operations.

Canada, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Miller Thomson LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Debt, Tax deduction, Cashflow, Debtor in possession, Bridge loan, Canada Revenue Agency, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act 1985 (Canada)