Does a claim for a balance of sale of shares, originally owed by one of the two entities that amalgamated to become the debtor, constitute an equity claim pursuant to section 2(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act1 (hereafter the BIA) in the context of a proposal of that same debtor?

If so, what are the consequences for the Seller?

Background

Questions en litige

Est ce qu’une créance relative à un solde de prix de vente d’actions, initialement due par une des deux entités ayant fusionné pour devenir la débitrice, constitue une réclamation relative à des capitaux propres au sens de l’article 2 (1) de la Loi sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité1 (ci après la « LFI ») dans le cadre de la proposition de cette même débitrice?

Le cas échéant, quelles sont les conséquences pour le Vendeur?

Trame factuelle

With many businesses headed towards a ‘winter of discontent,’ dealing with a combination of the after effects of Covid19 related disruption, supply chain issues, soaring inflation and labour shortages, we are undoubtedly going to see a continued rise in insolvencies over the coming months which will emerge in many different and often unpredictable forms.

What could happen this winter?

Alex Jay, Head of Insolvency and Asset Recovery, discusses how companies can protect themselves from rising insolvency risks as businesses begin to emerge from the pandemic and commercial pressure increases.

Insolvency risk can affect businesses and individuals in a number of ways.  Markets can turn rapidly – think for example of the recent spate of energy company failures – and can catch you off guard.

22 October 2021 sees the return of winding-up petitions without heavy restrictions. It marks the first day in 18 months that a creditor could present a winding-up petition without having to consider the financial implications of Covid-19 on the company.

A recent High Court judgment has provided some clarity on issues arising from the Debt Respite Scheme (Breathing Space Moratorium and Mental Health Crisis Moratorium) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020 (“the Regulations 2020”). Partner Alex Jay and Senior Paralegal Aarti Chadda examine the judgment and its interpretation of the Regulations 2020.

In Her Majesty the Queen v. Canada North Group Inc., the Supreme Court of Canada (the Court) held that lower courts can permit the grant of court ordered charges under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, RSC 1985, c C-36 (the CCAA), including the interim lender’s charge, in priority to the Minister of National Revenue’s (the Minister) statutory deemed trust claims under the Income Tax Act, RSC 1985 c 1 (the ITA).

Investor frauds never go away

Non-professional investors are often enticed by promises of high returns to place money into schemes that turn out to be scams. These schemes adopt many guises and forms. But do they ever change, and how likely are they to emerge as the expected post-Covid economic uncertainty takes effect? Head of Insolvency and Asset Recovery Alex Jay examines investor fraud and how the insolvency process can help victims recover some of their money.

Increases in fraud and insolvency predicted

On June 17, 2021, the Alberta Court of Appeal (ABCA) dismissed two companion appeals in the receivership proceedings of Accel Canada Holdings Limited (Holdings) and Accel Energy Canada Limited (Energy and together with Holdings, Accel).

On March 30, 2021, the Supreme Court of British Columbia (the Court) made an initial order under the Companies Creditors Arrangement Act (the CCAA) in respect of EncoreFX Inc. (EncoreFX) one year after the commencement of its bankruptcy proceedings. The decision is unusual in that the applicant for the CCAA initial order was EncoreFX’s trustee in bankruptcy (the Trustee), who also sought to be appointed as monitor of EncoreFX (with enhanced powers). On April 22, 2021, the Court released the reasons for its decision.¹