• Draft regulations implementing Canada’s “bail-in” solvency support regime for banks came into effect on September 23, 2018.
• The bail-in regime essentially requires that banks maintain “embedded contingent capital” in the form of bonds that convert automatically to equity in the event that the issuing bank has ceased or is about to cease to be viable.
• Key to the regime is the concept of “total loss-absorbing capacity”, or TLAC, which is the amount of embedded contingent capital that a bank will now be required to maintain (on a consolidated basis).
• As discussed b

• Le règlement mettant en œuvre le régime de « recapitalisation interne (émission) » au soutien de la solvabilité des banques au Canada est entré en vigueur le 23 septembre 2018.
• Ce régime de recapitalisation interne exige essentiellement des banques qu’elles maintiennent des « fonds propres d’urgence intégrés » sous forme d’obligations pouvant être automatiquement converties en actions si jamais elles cessent d’être viables ou sont sur le point de ne plus l’être.
• La clé du régime est le concept de capacité totale d’absorption des pertes

UBS terminated its ISDA Master and FX transactions with Lehman Brothers Inc., was obligated to return about $23 million in collateral, wanted to set-off against that $23 million amounts owing by LBI to UBS affiliates as contemplated by the cross-affiliates set-off provision.

If you were waiting to hear what the English Court of Appeal had to say about the lower court decision in Marine Trade S.A. v. Pioneer Freight Futures Co. Ltd. you’ll be disappointed, as the appeal was dismissed by consent of the parties on October 22, 2010.

That darn Lehman Brothers bankruptcy sure is raising some interesting insolvency issues for derivatives market participants (and their lawyers of course). It’s interesting (at least for us insolvency nerds) to think about how some of those issues might play out under Canadian insolvency laws. Here are some thoughts on one of the recent cases with my Canadian spin.

On July 14, 2009, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released its decision in Canada (Attorney General) v. Reliance Insurance Company, an application regarding the allocation of surplus arising from the liquidation of the Canadian branch (Reliance Canada) of U.S.-based Reliance Insurance Company (Reliance U.S.), a property and casualty insurer that was itself in liquidation.