There may be hope on the horizon for insolvent Canadian cannabis companies who wish to seek recognition proceedings south of the border.
The enforcement of court orders that are designed to preserve, trace or track crypto-assets within North America is often limited in practice. As seen in the recent Ontario decision of Cicada 137 LLC v. Medjedovic (“Cicada”),[1] mechanisms by which legal enforcement principles can be effectively applied against stolen or misappropriated crypto-assets are constrained.
On January 13, 2023, the Supreme Court granted the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians’ Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to resolve the split of circuits on whether Section 106 of the Bankruptcy Code evinces Congress’ unequivocal intent to abrogate Native American Tribes’ sovereign immunity.1
Deepening a split of circuits, the First Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Bankruptcy Code waived the sovereign immunity of Native American Tribes. The May 6, 2022 opinion by Judge Sandra L.
Exploring the bounds of concreteness and traceability following the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, the Sixth Circuit in Krueger v. Experian, et al. recently reversed a grant of summary judgment in favor of a lender in a Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) case, finding that the plaintiff had a sufficiently concrete injury to support Article III standing.
The Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) was a forgivable loan program administered by the US Small Business Administration (“SBA”) that was created as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) in March 2020. The PPP ended on May 31, 2021. Since the passage of the CARES Act, litigation has ensued over whether companies in bankruptcy are eligible to receive PPP loans.
In what can only be described as a bitter pill to swallow for the professionals involved, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List) (the “Court”) in Duca Financial Services Credit Union Ltd. v.
On July 2, 2020, the Court of Appeal for Ontario (the “Court”) released its decision in Hutchingame Growth Capital Corporation v.
On July 2, 2020, the Court of Appeal for Ontario (the “Court”) released its decision in Hutchingame Growth Capital Corporation v.
On March 26, 2020, leave to appeal the decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal (the “Alberta CA”) in Canada v. Canada North Group Inc.1 (“Canada North Group”) was granted by the Supreme Court of Canada (the “SCC”).2 No reasons were given.