Derivatives market participants will want to pay close attention to Industry Canada’s recent discussion paper regarding its review of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and
The Court of Appeal for Ontario's (the "OCA") decision in Re Indalex Ltd.1 was decried by professionals in pension, banking and insolvency practices. On February 1, 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada (the "SCC" or the "Court") overturned the OCA's decision.
Swaps market participants accepting cash collateral from an entity subject to Ontario provincial pension benefits legislation will want to consider the implications of this decision on their priority. Unfortunately and somewhat surprisingly, the Supreme Court of Canada did not overturn a key part of the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision.
On December 7, 2012, the Supreme Court of Canada issued its ruling in Newfoundland and Labrador v. AbitibiBowater Inc., 2012 SCC 67 and in so doing, closed an important chapter in the successful cross-border restructuring of AbitibiBowater Inc. - now Resolute Forest Products - under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (the "CCAA") and Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.
Facts of the Case
Where an insured deposit taking institution (and let’s just call it abank to make things easy) is subject to a receivership order under the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act (CDIC Act) the government can incorporate a bridge bank to take over the good assets and run the bank until it can be sold. If it does so the usual exemptions from the statutory stays for termination, netting and collateral enforcement for el
Bill C-45 proposes changes to the Payment Clearing and Settlement Act to enhance certainty that clearing house default rules will be enforceable in the event of a clearing member default. These reforms are an important aspect of financial markets reforms
On September 6, 2012, the Commission des lésions professionnelles (the CLP) deliberated on the interpretation of article 316 of An Act Respecting Industrial Accidents and Occupational Diseases(the Act) which states that the Commission de la santé et de la sécurité du travail (the CSST) can require from an employer that retains the services of a contractor to pay the assessment due by said contractor.
In a decision issued on April 20th, 2012, Justice Robert Mongeon of the Superior Court of Quebec gave a decisive answer to one of the most troubling questions facing debtors and DIP lenders in reorganizations under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act(CCAA).
In a succinct decision rendered on January 12, the same day as the hearing, the Supreme Court of Canada finally settled the question of whether requirements to pay, issued pursuant to section 317 of the Excise Tax Act ("ETA") prior to the bankruptcy of a tax debtor, but not paid before such time, remain valid against the garnishee.1 Supreme Court Justice LeBel, speaking on behalf of the Court, simply stated that the Court agreed with the reasons of Noël J.A. of the Federal Court of Appeal.
UBS terminated its ISDA Master and FX transactions with Lehman Brothers Inc., was obligated to return about $23 million in collateral, wanted to set-off against that $23 million amounts owing by LBI to UBS affiliates as contemplated by the cross-affiliates set-off provision.