Fulltext Search

In Callidus Capital Corporation v. Her Majesty the Queen,[1] the Supreme Court of Canada overturned a troubling 2017 decision of the Federal Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court held unanimously that the bankruptcy of a debtor extinguishes the deemed trust for unremitted GST and HST created in favour of the Crown (“CRA”) by section 222 of the Excise Tax Act (“ETA”).

“[C]ourts may account for hypothetical preference actions within a hypothetical [C]hapter 7 liquidation” to hold a defendant bank (“Bank”) liable for a payment it received within 90 days of a debtor’s bankruptcy, held the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on March 7, 2017.In re Tenderloin Health, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 4008, *4 (9th Cir. March 7, 2017).

The Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (“Bankruptcy Rules”) require each corporate party in an adversary proceeding (i.e., a bankruptcy court suit) to file a statement identifying the holders of “10% or more” of the party’s equity interests. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7007.1(a). Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn, relying on another local Bankruptcy Rule (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. R.

A Chapter 11 debtor “cannot nullify a preexisting obligation in a loan agreement to pay post-default interest solely by proposing a cure,” held a split panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Nov. 4, 2016. In re New Investments Inc., 2016 WL 6543520, *3 (9th Cir. Nov. 4, 2016) (2-1).

While a recent federal bankruptcy court ruling provides some clarity as to how midstream gathering agreements may be treated in Chapter 11 cases involving oil and gas exploration and production companies (“E&Ps”), there are still many questions that remain. This Alert analyzes and answers 10 important questions raised by the In re Sabine Oil & Gas Corporation decision of March 8, 2016.[1]

An asset purchaser’s payments into segregated accounts for the benefit of general unsecured creditors and professionals employed by the debtor (i.e., the seller) and its creditors’ committee, made in connection with the purchase of all of the debtor’s assets, are not property of the debtor’s estate or available for distribution to creditors according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit — even when some of the segregated accounts were listed as consideration in the governing asset purchase agreement. ICL Holding Company, Inc., et al. v.

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。

Bankruptcy courts may hear state law disputes “when the parties knowingly and voluntarily consent,” held the U.S. Supreme Court on May 26, 2015. Wellness Int’l Network Ltd. v. Sharif, 2015 WL 2456619, at *3 (May 26, 2015). That consent, moreover, need not be express, reasoned the Court. Id. at *9 (“Nothing in the Constitution requires that consent to adjudication by a bankruptcy court be express.”). Reversing the U.S.

It is no secret that the mining sector is facing tough times. In recent boom years, mining companies took on unprecedented amounts of debt. Now that commodity prices have dropped and sources of refinancing have dried up, debt obligations have become overwhelming for many companies, posing a serious risk to their survival.

Canada

Following the Dec. 8 publication by the American Bankruptcy Institute (“ABI”) Commission to Study the Reform of Chapter 11 of a report (the “Report”) recommending changes to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (“Code”),[1] we continue to analyze the proposals contained in the ABI’s 400-page Report. One proposal we wanted to immediately highlight would, if adopted, significantly increase the risk profile for secured lenders.