Fulltext Search
Court of Appeal of Alberta to Reconsider Whether Gross Overriding Royalties Run With The Land

A recent chambers decision holding that gross overriding royalties (“GOR”) can be vested off in a reverse vesting order (“RVO”) is on its way up to the Court of Appeal of Alberta (the “ABCA”). The ABCA has granted leave to appeal Invico Diversified Income Limited Partnership v NewGrange Energy Inc, 2024 ABKB 214 (“Invico”).

The Chambers Decision

Canada, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McMillan LLP, Court of Appeal of Alberta
Is this the Peak for Reverse Vesting Orders?: BC Court of Appeal Confirms Jurisdiction to Grant RVOs in Receiverships

The BC Court of Appeal has confirmed the jurisdiction for Canadian courts to make reverse vesting orders (“RVO”) in receivership proceedings. British Columbia v.

Canada, British Columbia, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fasken, Insolvency, British Columbia Court of Appeal
It’s All Peakhill From Here: Appellate Confirmation of Courts’ Jurisdiction to Grant Reverse Vesting Orders in Receivership Proceedings

On July 2, 2024, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia (the “Court”) released its highly anticipated decision in British Columbia v. Peakhill Capital Inc., 2024 BCCA 246 (“Peakhill”) concerning the use of reverse vesting orders (“RVOs”) to effect sale transactions structured to avoid provincial property transfer taxes for the benefit of creditors.

Canada, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Aird & Berlis LLP | Aird & McBurney LP, Receivership
The Oilers Stay Alive: Court of Appeal Denies Leave to Appeal the approval of a SISP and a Stalking Horse Purchase Agreement in the Canadian Overseas Petroleum Limited Matter

BP Canada Energy Group ULC (“BP”) has applied for leave to appeal a decision under section 13 of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”) and for a stay of the orders rendered by Justice Yamauchi on April 24, 2024

Canada, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fasken, Court of Appeal of Alberta
Bay Street Lawyers Beware: U.S. Court Finds Conflict of Interest Representing Debtor and One of Its Major Shareholders in Bankruptcy Proceedings

Many litigators and corporate lawyers view the practice of representing a large shareholder and the company in which it is invested as common practice. In many instances, no conflict of interest will ever materialize such that the shareholder and the company require separate representation. However, in a recent opinion rendered by the United States Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of Virginia (the “Court”), a large international law firm (the “Firm”) was disqualified from representing Enviva Inc.

Canada, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Aird & Berlis LLP | Aird & McBurney LP, Private equity
Corporate Restructuring Meets Intellectual Property: Quebec Superior Court Overturns Disclaimer Notice and Issues the First Canadian Interpretation of Usage Rights under the CCAA

In the Endoceutics case[1], the Superior Court recently clarified the application of section 32 of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act

Canada, Quebec, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McMillan LLP
Substance Over Process: Win under the Fraudulent Preference Act Raises Interesting Questions

Creditors want to recover as much money as they can from their debtors as quickly and painlessly as possible. When those debtors take steps to delay, defeat and hinder a creditor’s recovery, creditors can rely on the Fraudulent Preference Act, RSBC 1996, c. 164 (“FPA”) and the Fraudulent Conveyance Act, RSBC 1996, c. 163 (“FCA”) to set aside transactions that have that intention and effect. Generally, the FCA allows “creditors and others” to void dispositions of property designed to delay, hinder or defraud their claims.

Canada, British Columbia, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fasken, Credit (finance), Financial Conduct Authority (UK), British Columbia Court of Appeal
Lenders Exhale: Qualex overturned on appeal, confirming the application of Redwater

Just over a year ago, the Alberta Court of King’s Bench (“ACKB”) decision in Qualex-Landmark Towers v 12-10 Capital Corp (“Qualex”)[1] extended the application of an environmental regulator’s priority entitlements in bankruptcy and insolvency to civ

Canada, Alberta, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, McMillan LLP, Mediation, Due diligence, Supreme Court of Canada, Court of Appeal of Alberta
Creditors Rejoice: Ontario Court of Appeal Confirms Summary Judgment Is ‘Tailor-Made’ to Enforce Liquidated Claims

2275518 Ontario Inc. v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank, 2024 ONCA 343

On May 6, 2024, the Ontario Court of Appeal upheld a summary judgment motion decision in favour of The Toronto-Dominion Bank (“TD Bank”) in 2275518 Ontario Inc. v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank, 2024 ONCA 343.[1]

Canada, Ontario, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Aird & Berlis LLP | Aird & McBurney LP
The Not So Royal Treatment: Alberta Court Vests Off Gross Overriding Royalties in Insolvency

Overview

In the recent decision of Invico Diversified Income Limited Partnership v NewGrange Energy Inc, 2024 ABKB 214 (“NewGrange”), the Alberta Court of King’s Bench clarified when gross overriding royalties (“GOR”) can be vested out of a debtor company’s estate pursuant to a reverse vesting order (“RVO”). The Court allowed GORs to be vested off under the Applicant’s, Invico Diversified Income Limited Partnership (“Invico”), proposed RVO, finding the GORs to be mere contractual rights and not proper interests in land.

Canada, Alberta, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fasken