The economies of the United States (U.S.) and Canada are closely intertwined. As operations expand across the border, so too do the complexities associated with carrying on business - particularly the insolvency of a company spanning both jurisdictions. As such, understanding how to navigate the complexities of Canadian insolvency regimes is essential to successfully doing business in the country.
1. Legislation and court system
In the matter of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (the “CCAA”) of Bloom Lake, the Superior Court of Québec rendered a judgment regarding the expansion of the powers of the monitor in a context where a creditor refused to produce documentation requested by the debtors.
Dans le cadre de l’affaire Bloom Lake relative à la Loi sur les arrangements avec les créanciers des compagnies (la « Lacc »), la Cour supérieure du Québec prononce un jugement au sujet de l'élargissement des pouvoirs du contrôleur dans un contexte où un créancier refusait de produire la documentation demandée par les débitrices.
The single proceeding model, which is a core tenet in insolvency proceedings, was recently reaffirmed in the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”) proceedings of Bloom Lake in Re Bloom Lake, 2021 QCCS 3402.
A comparison of the key differences between Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.
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.
In Her Majesty the Queen v. Canada North Group Inc., the Supreme Court of Canada (the Court) held that lower courts can permit the grant of court ordered charges under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, RSC 1985, c C-36 (the CCAA), including the interim lender’s charge, in priority to the Minister of National Revenue’s (the Minister) statutory deemed trust claims under the Income Tax Act, RSC 1985 c 1 (the ITA).
The Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision in Canada v.Canada North Group Inc.[1] provided much needed clarity regarding the order of priority for unremitted source deductions in restructuring proceedings.
Good evening.
Following are this week’s summaries of the Court of Appeal for Ontario for the week of September 13, 2021.
The Nortel Networks Corporation saga was unique for the parties, the lawyers and the judges. Judge Gross of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware and I presided over the case in a joint trial that had never occurred before3.
Bankruptcy law makes possible the financial rehabilitation of bankrupt individuals by discharging them from the burden of past debts upon the equitable distribution of their assets among their creditors. One of the primary purposes of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3 (the “BIA”) is to give honest but unfortunate debtors a fresh start in circumstances where it is prudent to forgive the debt or liability that resulted from inadvertence, negligence, or incompetence.