In Meunerie B.L. inc., Re (2007), EYB 2007-126274, 2007 QCCA 1601 (Que. C.A.) affirming (2006), EYB 2006-109274, 2006 QCCS 4914 (Que. S.C.) Meunerie B.L. Inc. (“Meunerie”) made an assignment in accordance with the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”). At the time of bankruptcy Meunerie was a mill which processed corn purchased from corn producers. Corn that was delivered to Meunerie was stored on site in silos

All businesses know that one key to profitability is risk management. Particularly in such industries as oil and natural gas, eligible financial contracts have emerged as an invaluable tool to hedge the risk associated with volatile foreign currency exchange, interest rates and commodity prices. Indeed, a large business has developed proffering over-the-counter derivatives (or ‘swaps’) and standardized exchange-traded derivatives (or ‘futures’) to do just that.

Courts will only rarely and sparingly interfere with contractual rights that parties freely negotiate and agree upon.

However, in Protiva Biotherapeutics Inc. v. Inex Pharmaceuticals Corp., the British Columbia Court of Appeal recently determined that it could adjust contractual rights in order to achieve a workable plan of arrangement proposed by a company under the British Columbia Business Corporations Act (“Act”).

Second and third time personal bankruptcies are uncommon, but fourth time bankruptcies are so rare they deserve recognition. The Supreme Court of British Columbia was recently presented with one such instance when Mr. Douglas Kusch applied for a discharge from his fourth bankruptcy.

In Father & Son Investments Inc. v. Maverick Brewing Corp. (2007), 2007 CarswellAlta 1452 (Alta. Q.B.), Maverick Brewing Corporation (“Maverick”) operated a brewery in Edmonton in space leased from Five Oaks Inc. (“Five Oaks”). The two major creditors of Maverick were Father & Son Investments Inc. (“Father & Son”) and Five Oaks. Pursuant to a postponement and subordination of security interest document, Five Oaks had priority over Father & Son to the assets of Maverick.

Guy Manning and Paul Kennedy, Campbells

This is an extract from the 2020 edition of the Americas Restructuring Review, published by Global Restructuring Review. The whole publication is available here.

In summary

This chapter provides an update and recap of material developments in the Cayman Islands in restructuring and insolvency over the past two years.

Christopher Harlowe and Christopher Levers, Mourant

This is an extract from the first edition of GRR's The Art of the Pre-Pack. The whole publication is available here.

The Cayman Islands has established itself as the jurisdiction of choice for financially sophisticated businesses such as hedge funds, private equity funds, special purpose vehicles and trusts that use offshore vehicles.

Adopting the analysis of the United Kingdom Jurisdictional Task Force ('UKJT") on the proprietary status of crypto currencies, a recent decision of the English High Court, AA v Persons Unknown,^[1] has found that crypto assets such as Bitcoin are "property" and therefore capable of being the subject of a proprietary injunction or freezing order.

The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal has provided much needed clarification of the test for validating certain transactions by companies that are subject to a winding up petition, pursuant to section 99 of the Companies Law (2020 Revision) (the "Companies Law").

The Legal Issue of Principle

The Court of Appeal has provided much needed clarification of the test for validating certain transactions by companies that are subject to a winding-up petition, pursuant to Section 99 of the Companies Law (2020 Revision).