Ronit J Berkovich and Olga F Peshko, Weil Gotshal & Manges
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Timothy Graulich and Elliot Moskowitz, Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
Fernando Daniel Hernandez, Marval O’Farrell & Mairal
This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.
In summary
In Canada v. Canada North Group Inc., 2019 ABCA 314, the Court of Appeal of Alberta (the “ABCA”) upheld the decision of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta (the “Lower Court”), which held that the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”) permits courts to subordinate statutory deemed trusts in favour of the Crown to court-ordered insolvency priming charges.
On November 1, 2019, a number of amendments to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (the “BIA”) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”) will come into force pursuant to the Canadian federal government’s budget implementation legislation for 2018 and 2019.
Vesting orders have become one of the most powerful tools in an insolvency professional’s toolkit, providing a purchaser with the comfort that the encumbrances contributing to the debtor’s financial difficulties cannot follow to the new owner. In light of their importance, Canadian insolvency and banking professionals were understandably anxious when the Ontario Court of Appeal (the “OCA” or the “Court”) recently asked for submissions on whether receivership vesting orders can extinguish third party interests in land in the nature of a Gross Overriding Royalty (a “GOR”).1
In an April 30, 2019 endorsement accompanying a receivership order made in the matter of Royal Bank of Canada and D.M. Robichaud Associates Ltd. (“D.M. Robichaud”), Justice Hainey of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Commercial List (the “Court”) held that the receiver’s charge and the receiver’s borrowings charge should have priority over deemed trusts under provincial construction legislation.1
The judicial managers of offshore oil and gas group Swiber have announced a restructuring plan for the company – which includes handing over shares to its professional services providers in part-payment of fees.
Judicial managers Bob Yap Cheng Ghee, Ong Pang Thye and Tay Puay Cheng of KPMG published the plan on 7 May, urging creditors to vote in favour to avoid Swiber’s liquidation.
Hong Kong’s restructuring scene is one of the most cross-border in the world, with three-quarters of its listed companies incorporated offshore and most restructurings having a mainland China connection. But the territory still lacks a statutory regime for cross-border recognition – as recently brought into focus in the restructuring of Singaporean engineering company CW Group. What does this mean for international insolvencies in the region?
In January, we wrote about a decision of Justice Watt of the Ontario Court of Appeal, which addressed the question of which appeal procedure must be followed in appeals of Orders made in proceedings constituted under both the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (the “BIA”) and the