In Dynamex Friction Ltd v Amicus an administrator had dismissed the entire workforce immediately on being appointed because the company had no money to pay its debts. At that time no transferee of the insolvent business had been identified and there was no prospect of a sale. However, the administrator did shortly afterwards agree a sale of the remaining company assets to a newly formed purchaser company that had links with the directors of the ‘old’ company.

Typically, courts will only rarely and sparingly interfere with contractual rights that parties freely negotiate and agree upon.

However, in Protiva Biotherapeutics Inc. v. Inex Pharma­ceuticals Corp., the British Columbia Court of Appeal recently determined that the courts can adjust contractual rights in order to achieve a workable plan of arrangement proposed by a company under the British Columbia Business Corporations Act (the "Act").

In order to get the information necessary to seize a debtor's assets or garnish his income, Rule 60.18 of the Rules of Court permit a creditor to require a debtor to attend an ex­amination under oath be­fore a court reporter and be questioned in relation to:

(a) the reason for non-payment or non-performance of the judgment;

(b) the debtor's income and property;

(c) the debts owed to and by the debtor;

(d) the disposal the debtor has made of any property either before or after the making of the order;

The Commission has opened a formal investigation under EC Treaty state aid rules into a series of aids amounting to €40.7 million that Italy intends to grant to Legler S.p.A, a denim textile producer. The Commission doubts at this stage that the restructuring plan of Legler S.p.A. would restore the beneficiary's commercial viability and is concerned that the aid would create undue distortions of competition in this highly competitive market. The opening of the formal investigation gives interested parties an opportunity to comment on the proposed measures.

A recent insolvency law case in the Dutch Supreme Court could have serious consequences for software licensees faced with a bankrupt supplier or licensor. The effect of the judgment may be to render traditional software escrow agreements insufficient and to require additional protective measures.

Summary

Spanish insolvency law has been modified recently by Act 22/2003. This is the culmination of a long process aimed at including in Spanish Law an insolvency law that will rectify the failures of previous legislation and create a law that fits in with social, economic and legal reality. In order to incorporate the criminal sanctions available against insolvent companies, this Act has also modified various articles of the Penal Code.

Courts will only rarely and sparingly interfere with contractual rights that parties freely negotiate and agree upon.

However, in Protiva Biotherapeutics Inc. v. Inex Pharmaceuticals Corp., the British Columbia Court of Appeal recently determined that it could adjust contractual rights in order to achieve a workable plan of arrangement proposed by a company under the British Columbia Business Corporations Act (“Act”).

Should Lenders be Concerned?

In the United States, claims for “deepening insolvency” have been advanced against lenders and investment bankers to insolvent companies as well as against the officers and directors of insolvent companies. Experience suggests that developments in U.S. commercial laws tend to be imported north of the border.1 Accordingly, lenders should be aware of the existence of the theory of deepening insolvency and the risk of creditors attempting to use it in Canada.

What is Deepening Insolvency?