On April 24, 2017, the Alberta Court of Appeal issued a decision in Orphan Well Association v Grant Thornton Limited, 2017 ABCA 124. The decision is arguably the past year’s most hotly anticipated and discussed decision in Alberta, despite involving bankruptcy proceedings of a relatively small junior oil and gas company. The Court of Appeal, in a 2-1 split, upheld the trial judge’s decision that a receiver can disclaim or renounce uneconomic assets that are subject to costly environmental liabilities.
The Court of Appeal of Ontario found in Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Konga that the interpretation of a guarantee is a question of mixed fact and law, entitled to deference on appeal. Further, for a guarantor to obtain a discharge from the guarantee, he must establish that the bank's demand caused the debtor's default.
The Lightstream decision confirms that Canadian courts have the jurisdiction under the CCAA to both: (i) incorporate and apply the oppression remedy; and (ii) where appropriate, when oppressive conduct has occurred, grant an order requiring a corporation to issue additional securities. However, such jurisdiction is limited and defined by the scheme and purpose of the CCAA.
In Re Lightstream Resources Ltd, 2016 ABQB 665 (Lightstream), the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta (Court) confirmed that it had jurisdiction to remedy oppressive conduct while a business is restructuring under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). The decision also provides insight as to when a court might exercise its equitable jurisdiction to remedy oppressive conduct in a CCAA proceeding.
Background
From the public policy standpoint, there has been a shift towards more environmental stewardship in Canada, evidenced by heightened media attention on environmental issues and by an expanded legal framework relating to the management of environmental liabilities. For example, directors may be personally liable for violation of environmental statutes1 and may face reputational harm if the corporations they manage are found to have breached environmental rules or norms.
El Tribunal Supremo rechaza el ejercicio de las acciones rescisorias especiales del Derecho concursal contra una escisión de sociedades inscrita en el Registro Mercantil, y afirma que la protección de los acreedores debe realizarse por vía resarcitoria.
El Tribunal Constitucional confirma la constitucionalidad de las exigencias y requisitos legales para poder acceder al recurso de suplicación.
Este post trata de analizar el alcance la Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional 173/2016, de 17 de octubre, así como de la de la doctrina del mismo órgano que la precede y que es sintetizada en la misma.
La sentencia de 10 de noviembre de 2016 de la sala cuarta del TJUE se ha pronunciado sobre los requisitos que deben reunir las prendas de cuenta corriente para quedar cubiertas por el régimen de garantías financieras de la Directiva 47/2002.
El TJUE ha respondido a las cuestiones prejudiciales elevadas por el Tribunal Supremo de Letonia sobre el ámbito de aplicación de la Directiva, después de que los órganos de primera instancia y de apelación letones desestimaran la demanda interpuesta por una compañía letona frente a una entidad financiera.
On December 10, 2016, the Forfeited Corporate Property Act, 2015 ("FCPA") came into force in Ontario. The FCPA has the effect of amending the Ontario Business Corporations Act ("OBCA") and the Corporations Act. There are also similar amendments made to the Ontario Not-for-Profit Corporations Act ("ONPCA"), but they have not yet come into force. The legislation effects changes to forfeiture of corporate real estate and corporate record-keeping requirements.
Does a fine imposed on a debtor by the disciplinary committee of the Chambre de la sécurité financière after the date of the debtor's bankruptcy constitute a provable claim pursuant to section 121(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (the "BIA")?
Introduction