Under the equity of exoneration, where jointly owned property is charged to secure the indebtedness of one joint owner, the other joint owner is presumed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to be acting as a surety only, and is entitled to be exonerated by the principal debtor. This long established principle remains relevant in the modern day, as was recently demonstrated in Day v Shaw.

This is an update to our September 2013 Blakes Bulletin: Increases to Alberta Licensee Liability Rating Program.

On April 17, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada denied leave to appeal to Nortel from the decision rendered by the Ontario Court of Appeal last October. For additional details and commentary on the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, please see our November 2013 Blakes Bulletin: Ontario Court of Appeal Applies AbitibiBowater Test in Concurrent Decisions.

Novedades concursales y fiscales introducidas por el Real Decreto‑ley 4/2014, de 7 de marzo, por el que se adoptan medidas urgentes en materia de refinanciación y reestructuración de deuda empresarial (B.O.E. de 8 de marzo de 2014) A. Objeto de la Reforma Con la entrada en vigor el pasado 9 de marzo del Real Decreto‑ley 4/2014, de 7 de marzo, por el que se adoptan medidas urgentes en materia de refinanciación y reestructuración de deuda empresarial (el “RD‑Ley 4/2014”), el ejecutivo trata de mejorar el marco legal de los acuerdos de refinanciación (los “Acuerdos de Refinanciación”).

Novedades concursales y fiscales introducidas por el Real Decreto‑ley 4/2014, de 7 de marzo, por el que se adoptan medidas urgentes en materia de refinanciación y reestructuración de deuda empresarial (B.O.E. de 8 de marzo de 2014)

Chapter 11
and CCAA
» A Cross-Border Comparison

On November 12, 2013, the Alberta government issued EPPA Update 13-01, in response to recent developments in the actuarial profession affecting defined benefit pension (DB) plans.

On February 1, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) released its decision in Sun Indalex Finance, LLC v. United Steelworkers (Re Indalex). With respect to one critical issue,the SCC confirmed that a court-ordered debtor-in-possession (DIP) charge had priority over a deemed trust (akin to a statutory security interest) securing the debtor's obligation to fund a pension wind-up deficiency on the wind-up of a defined benefit (DB) pension plan.

On February 1, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its much-anticipated decision in Sun Indalex Finance, LLC v. United Steelworkers et al. (Indalex). This bulletin focuses on pension plan administration issues arising from the Indalex case.

Facts

The long-awaited and highly anticipated decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in the Indalex case was released today. The decision stems from an appeal of an Ontario Court of Appeal decision dealing with a priority dispute between a court-ordered debtor-in-possession (DIP) charge granted under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) (CCAA) and a deemed trust for a wind-up pension deficiency asserted under the Pension Benefits Act (Ontario)(PBA).