A number of commentators have written articles about Part IV of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA), which deals with recognizing and enforcing foreign insolvency proceedings, however little has been written about the treatment of corporate groups in this context. Part IV of the CCAA deals with entities on an individual basis, and how to deal with corporate groups is not well addressed in international insolvency legislation.
The Indalex decision, released by the Ontario Court of Appeal earlier this year, gave priority to pension plan members over other secured creditors that had advanced funds to keep Indalex from bankruptcy. This case came as a surprise to many practitioners and may have far-reaching implications for pension plan administrators and creditors alike.&nbs
In 2008, the catastrophic effect of the credit crunch spread to most world economies. As in previous recessions, insolvency has affected increasing numbers of individuals and companies, and parties to agreements to arbitrate are increasingly likely to find themselves dealing with insolvent companies. What are the issues to bear in mind?
1/ Prior insolvency
On April 7, 2011, the Ontario Court of Appeal (the “OCA”) released its decision in Indalex Limited, ordering that the reserved sale proceeds of a going-concern sale involving the Canadian Indalex entities (“Indalex Canada”), held by the court-appointed monitor, FTI Consulting Inc.
The Ontario Court of Appeal released its decision in Indalex Limited (Re), 2011 ONCA 265 on April 7, 2011. The decision comes as a surprise to many pension and insolvency professionals, lenders and pension plan sponsors. The court, essentially, directed that monies held in reserve by the monitor appointed under the federal Companies Creditors Arrangement Act should be used to pay off pension fund deficits in preference to secured creditors.
Background
The Financial Markets and Insolvency (Settlement Finality and Financial Collateral Arrangements) (Amendment) Regulations 2010 came into force on 6 April 2011.
The Ontario Court of Appeal released its decision in Hydro One Inc. v. Ontario (Financial Services Commission) on January 11, 2010. This was an appeal from the Ontario Divisional Court – see our Labour & Employment in the News dated April 18, 2008, that reported on the Divisional Court’s decision. The court dismissed the appeal, in favour of members of the Hydro One Pension Plan (the “Plan”).
As part of what appears to be a global trend, the amount of litigation in Belgium is increasing rapidly. Litigation advice is fast becoming one of the most in-demand services in legal practice, along with advice on restructuring and employment. Due to the challenging economic and financial conditions, companies are now tending to commence debt collection proceedings as soon as their debtors fail to honour their debts, and are pre-emptively restructuring their businesses in order to avoid unnecessary costs which might eventually lead to bankruptcy.
With the current economic crisis significantly affecting global business, certain procedural remedies can be particularly useful in order to deal with unpaid debts.
The most common of these procedural remedies in Spain is the so-called 'proceso monitorio', which consists of a special payment procedure used for the recovery of specific monetary debts which: