En 2021, plusieurs décisions judiciaires d’importance pour les prêteurs commerciaux, les entreprises et les professionnels de l’insolvabilité ont été rendues d’un bout à l’autre du Canada.

In 2021, several significant judicial decisions were rendered across Canada relevant to commercial lenders, businesses and restructuring professionals. This comprehensive report summarizes the key facts and core issues of importance in each case and provides status updates on the cases reported on in our February 2021 bulletin, Key Developments in Canadian Insolvency Case Law in 2020.

“Retail apocalypse” was the phrase coined to describe the anticipated demise of the brick-and-mortar retail store in the face of the unparalleled convenience of online shopping and other electronic commerce. Over the past decade, in response to the challenges faced by the changing retail landscape, many shopping centres tried to “e-proof” their properties by emphasizing in-person experiences that can be provided through salons, arcades, movie theatres and restaurants.

Au début de la pandémie, on craignait que le nombre de dossiers de faillite grimpe de 35 % en 2020 et en 2021. Or, bien que certains secteurs aient été durement touchés, cette crainte ne s’est jamais matérialisée au Canada et aux États-Unis – possiblement en raison des mesures de soutien considérables qui ont été mises en œuvre par les gouvernements. Or, l’avenir ne semble pas tracé pour autant, puisque selon les prévisions d’Allianz Research, les procédures de faillite augmenteront de 15 % en 2022, alors que la croissance économique mondiale affichera un recul d’entre 5,5 % et 6 %.

At the start of the pandemic, insolvency filings were expected to increase by 35% in 2020 and 2021. While some industries were hit hard, this prediction never materialized in Canada and the U.S., possibly because of significant financial government support. The future is less clear, with Allianz Research forecasting, for 2022, a 15% increase in insolvency filings and a 5.5–6% decrease in global economic growth.

Below are five key trends that may impact insolvencies this year, based on data published by the World Bank:

In Pharmagona Limited v Taheri,(1) the High Court refused to seal and issue a contempt application as the breach, if it had occurred, was only technical, and it was therefore inappropriate for the application to succeed.

Facts

A comparison of the key differences between Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.

Read Now

Blakes and Blakes Business Class communications are intended for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice or an opinion on any issue. We would be pleased to provide additional details or advice about specific situations if desired.

Although not a new concept, use of the reverse vesting order (RVO) structure to effect distressed M&A transactions in proceedings under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) (CCAA) has quickly gained popularity in Canada over the last year. At its core, an RVO transaction involves a transfer of unwanted assets and liabilities — the “bad assets” — out of a distressed company into a newly established non-operating subsidiary, leaving the distressed business entity with only the “good assets” left to be acquired.

Background to the Restructuring Plan

The UK has introduced the Restructuring Plan; a new, flexible court supervised restructuring tool. The Restructuring Plan draws upon features of the existing Companies Act 2006 scheme of arrangement procedure (which remains available) but includes features which are new to the UK but similar to those under U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.

Le 1^er avril 2021, la Cour suprême du Canada a rejeté la demande d’autorisation d’appel de la décision de la Cour d’appel du Québec dans l’affaire Séquestre de Media5 Corporation, 2020 QCCA 943. Par conséquent, les tribunaux du Québec ont maintenant confirmation de la marche à suivre pour la nomination de séquestres nationaux à la demande des créanciers garantis.

Le 20 juillet 2020, la Cour d’appel du Québec annulait la décision rendue par la Cour supérieure et confirmait les principes suivants :