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

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.

The German Federal Court of Justice was recently asked to decide whether a waiver in favour of company director had been validated by the preliminary insolvency administrator's consent.

Background

(German federal high court – decision of September 24th, 2015 – IX ZR 272/13)

Legal background

In accordance with sec. 166 para 1 German Insolvency Code (“InsO”) an insolvency administrator is entitled to utilise tangible assets in his possession, even where the assets are encumbered.

Although the German Insolvency Code regulates the disposal and utilization of tangible assets and claims encumbered in favour of a creditor no regulation exists for rights such as shares, trademarks or intellectual property rights.