The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in the case of Re Indalex Ltd. [2013] SCC 6 (the “Decision”) does not, as one national newspaper put it place “creditors before pensioners”. The Decision which overturned the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Re Indalex Ltd. [2011] O.J. No.

In its unanimous decision, Ernst & Young Inc. v. Aquino, the Ontario Court of Appeal modified the common law doctrine of corporate attribution in the bankruptcy and insolvency context to uphold a decision of Ontario Superior Court’s Commercial List, which ordered a corporate officer and his associates, whom collectively orchestrated a fraudulent invoicing scheme, to repay over $30 million to company creditors pursuant to s. 96 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”).

Background

Except where otherwise noted, this paper is current as of September, 2011 and provides preliminary information on Canadian and British Columbia legal matters to assist you in establishing a business in British Columbia and provides general guidance only.

In Canada, the federal government enacted the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3 (“BIA”), which is intended to relieve honest but unfortunate debtors of their debts and to organize a process that allows for an orderly administration of the estate of the debtors.

The process created by the BIA sets out the duties and obligations of the various stakeholders involved in the insolvency proceeding and it establishes numerous deadlines by which certain tasks are required to be accomplished.

Some of the more salient delays include:

Since Nortel Networks Corporation and a number of related companies (together, “Nortel”), initiated a reorganization under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”) over two years ago, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment (the “MOE”) has sought to hold Nortel responsible to remediate environmental contamination remaining on properties once or currently owned by Nortel. Nortel has maintained that its responsibility for the environmental contamination should not be prioritized ahead of its other obligations.

On January 17, 2020, Justice Romaine of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench found that the Alberta Securities Commission’s (the “ASC”) administrative penalties against Theodor Hennig (“Hennig”) survived Hennig’s discharge in bankruptcy. This decision marks the first time a Canadian court has considered securities regulatory penalties within the context of subsection 178(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (the “BIA”).

MARY BUTTERY WINS IMPORTANT CASE FOR CENTURY SERVICES INC.

On January 31, 2019, the Supreme Court of Canada released its much-anticipated decision in Orphan Well Association et al. v. Grant Thornton Limited et al., 2019 SCC 5, commonly referred to as “Redwater”. Specifically, Redwater clarifies the priority as between environmental obligations and those afforded to secured creditors in insolvency proceedings.

In an important recent decision of the BC Court of Appeal, Davis LLP successfully represented its clients Century McMynn Leasing Partnership and GE Finance in Re Perimeter Transportation Ltd., 2010 BCCA 509.

On January 31, 2019, the Supreme Court of Canada released its much-anticipated decision in Orphan Well Association et al. v. Grant Thornton Limited et al., 2019 SCC 5, commonly referred to as “Redwater”. Specifically, Redwater clarifies the priority as between environmental obligations and those afforded to secured creditors in insolvency proceedings.