Jurisprudence canadienne récente en matière d’insolvabilité : ce que les prêteurs doivent savoir Linc Rogers, Caitlin McIntyre et Ilia Kravtsov L’issue d’un certain nombre de dossiers d’insolvabilité portés devant les tribunaux de diverses provinces du Canada en 2017 pourrait avoir une incidence importante sur les droits de réalisation et de recouvrement des prêteurs commerciaux dans le cadre de procédures de restructuration et d’insolvabilité.

The difference between debt and equity claims can cause confusion among lenders, creditors, and insolvency professionals alike. In Tudor Sales Ltd. (Re), the British Columbia Supreme Court provided further judicial guidance on this distinction.

When negotiating a commercial lease, it is in the landlord’s best interest to require that securities be provided by the prospective tenant in order to protect the landlord against the tenant’s failure to perform its obligations under the lease. A frequent cause of a tenant’s inability to perform its obligations is its insolvency or financial difficulties.

Lors de la négociation d’un bail commercial, le bailleur a tout intérêt à exiger des garanties de son futur locataire pour se protéger en cas d’inexécution des obligations de celui-ci. Une cause fréquente du manquement par le locataire à ses obligations est son insolvabilité ou des difficultés financières. Or, il est important pour tout bailleur de savoir que la faillite d’un locataire ou le dépôt par celui-ci d’un avis d’intention ou d’une proposition aux termes de la Loi sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité (« L.F.I.

When negotiating a commercial lease, the lessor has every interest in demanding guarantees from his future tenant to protect himself in case of non-fulfillment of his obligations. A common cause of the tenant's breach of his obligations is his insolvency or financial hardship. However, it is important for any lessor to know that a tenant's bankruptcy or filing of a notice of intention or a proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (" LFI ") may have the effect of annihilating the protection offered by certain guarantees.

A private member's bill, Bill C-372, was introduced on 17 October 2017 with proposed amendments to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies Creditors’ Arrangement Act. The Bill seeks to protect retired workers whose pensions and group insurance plans are at risk if their previous employer goes bankrupt or undergoes restructuring. The Bill would provide for priority status for claims in respect of underfunded pension plans, as well as claims arising as a result of an employer terminating its participation in a group insurance plan.

Good evening,

Below are this week’s summaries of the civil decisions of the Court of Appeal.

Topics this week included personal injury, family law, employment law, property law, mortgages, bankruptcy and insolvency and extensions of time to appeal.

Have a nice weekend.

In our update this month we take a look at three cases that provide helpful clarification from the courts on issues that will be of interest to the insolvency and fraud industry - the key message from each case confirms:

Defendant's threat of insolvency did not prevent adjudicator's decision being enforced.

Registering a financing statement under the Ontario PPSA[1] to perfect a security interest is a key means of protecting a secured creditor’s priority over collateral. It is important for secured creditors to be cognizant however that there are situations where other claims that are not subject to traditional registration requirements may still trump a secured creditor’s registered security interest.

The recent decision in ITB Marine Group Ltd. v. Northern Transportation Company Limited, 2017 BCSC 2007 ["ITB"] confirms the priority of pension claims in the insolvency context. The decision will be of interest to practitioners involved in priority disputes between secured creditors and beneficiaries of statutory deemed trusts, particularly those arising out of pension legislation.