A recent decision at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List) brought to the fore the role of fairness opinions in solvent arrangement transactions. In Re ChampionIron Mines Limited (Champion) the court approved the arrangement but deemed the fairness opinion inadmissible on the basis that it failed to disclose the reasons underlying its conclusion.
In Susi v. Bourke, 2014 O.J. No. 11
A Summary
In Susi v. Bourke, [2014] OJ No 11, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice held that when all of the directors of a corporation fail to comply with their fiduciary duties, none of them can seek a remedy for oppression.
On October 3, 2013, the Court of Appeal for Ontario issued two significant decisions1 on the interplay between provincial environmental remediation and federal insolvency orders. The cases are of interest to environmental and insolvency lawyers across Canada. They are equally of interest to taxpayers who foot remediation costs shifted through insolvency.
Background
An “Administration Charge” under the CCAA
The Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36, as amended (“CCAA”) permits a court having jurisdiction over proceedings for the restructuring of an insolvent company to make certain orders, to secure payment of the fees of certain officials involved in those proceedings, including the Monitor of the insolvent company appointed for the restructuring proceeding.
A surprising judgment re the “Administration Charge”
The Personal Insolvency Act 2012 (the “PI Act”) was signed into law on 26 December 2012 and introduces significant changes to the personal insolvency regime in Ireland, as described in our previous client briefing concerning the PI Act (issued in December 2012 and available on our website). All provisions of the PI Act, other than Part 4 which relates to bankruptcy, have now been commenced and it is expected that debtors will shortly be able to avail of the new insolvency measures.
The Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2013 (“the Act”) has been enacted. The Act addresses the unintended consequences arising from the Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2009 (“the 2009 Act”).
Summary
Punj Lloyd Ltd (PLL), the ultimate parent of Simon Carves Ltd (SCL), provided 'letters of support' (what would in North America be called 'comfort letters') indicating to the board of SCL that PLL would 'provide the necessary financial and business support to ensure that [SCL] continues as a going concern'. This is precisely what SCL did not do: it went into administration, leaving invoices unpaid and unsecured creditors largely out of luck.
Morris Kaiser’s trustee in bankruptcy, Soberman Inc., thought it smelled a rat: while claiming to be impecunious, Kaiser appeared to be living a life of ‘some means’, which included trips to casinos in the US. Kaiser claimed he was drawing advances on the credit card of a buddy, Cecil Bergman, but the trustee suspected the whole thing was a front to shield Kaiser’s assets from his creditors.
New legislation alters the law and procedures of personal insolvency in radical ways. The Personal Insolvency Act 2012 establishes an independent Insolvency Service of Ireland and introduces new insolvency procedures for addressing unsecured debts (of any value) and secured debts (up to €3 million in aggregate but without limit in the case of agreement). Current bankruptcy laws are amended, including a reduction of the bankruptcy term from 12 years to 3 and the carve-out of pension assets from the bankrupt’s estate.
The central question in Rubin v Eurofinance SA, [2012] UKSC 46, was whether the English courts ought to recognise the order or judgment of a foreign court to set aside transactions determined to be preferential or to have been at an undervalue, in circumstances where the defendant in the foreign proceedings was not present in the foreign jurisdiction or had not voluntarily submitted to its courts.