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
In Decision With Important Tax and Bankruptcy Implications, Supreme Court Rejects Application of So-Called 'Bob Richards Rule'

In its recent decision in Rodriguez v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., No. 18–1269 (Sup. Ct. Feb. 25, 2020), the Supreme Court held that federal courts may not apply the federal common law “Bob Richards Rule” to determine who owns a tax refund when a parent holding company files a tax return but a subsidiary generated the losses giving rise to the refund. Instead, the court should look to applicable state law.

General Legal Background

USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Tax, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (USA), Supreme Court of the United States