BACKGROUND

In a recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Poonian v. British Columbia (Securities Commission), the Court determined that while disgorgement orders made by the British Columbia Securities Commission (the “Commission”) survive bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (the “BIA”), administrative penalties may not.

Dissolution is the process of de-registering a company from the company registry at the Department of Business Development (“DBD”). When considering the life cycle of a business operation, the voluntary dissolution by the shareholders appears to be the usual way to end the company’s operations. There are several circumstances that will lead companies to the dissolution and subsequently, the liquidation process. Under Sections 1236 and 1237 of the CCC, a limited company may be dissolved by the following causes:

. . . In such circumstances, sealing the indictment “would undermine the purpose of having a statute of limitations at all.”

Introduction

L’un des principaux avantages pour un débiteur de se placer sous la protection de la Loi sur les arrangements avec les créanciers des compagnies (« LACC ») ou de la Loi sur la faillite et l’insolvabilité (« LFI ») consiste en la suspension des procédures pouvant être intentées par un créancier faisant face à un défaut de paiement. Cette suspension des procédures permet notamment à la débitrice de se réorganiser ou de disposer de certains ou de l’ensemble de ses actifs sous la supervision du tribunal. Or, certaines exceptions existent.

Executive Summary:

The amendments recently notified to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) Regulations, 2017, require the information utility to verify key details such as the e-mail address of the debtor, the document showing proof of debt, etc. before issuance of record of default.

The decision confirms that an arbitration agreement will be upheld in the face of insolvency proceedings only if it can be shown that the petition debt is genuinely disputed on substantial grounds.

It is essential that any UK individual or entity doing business, managing funds/other economic resources, or providing financing or professional services, keeps abreast of the current UK Russian sanctions regime, which is chiefly set out in the Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (the "Regulations"). The question of how the Regulations might apply to those with fiduciary duties – either as trustees or as directors – has been considered in two recent High Court cases.

This week’s TGIF considers a recent Federal Court of Australia decision (Connelly (liquidator) v Papadopoulos, in the matter of TSK QLD Pty Ltd (in liq) [2024] FCA 888). In the case, it was determined that a restructuring adviser who engineered an asset-stripping scheme may be found liable for the full value of the loss arising out of the scheme.

Key Takeaways