Ford Credit Canada Limited (plaintiff) v. Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. and Royle Smith (defendants) ( , BK ; 2010 ABQB 798)
|
|
- Joseph Willis Scott
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Ford Credit Canada Limited (plaintiff) v. Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. and Royle Smith (defendants) ( , BK ; 2010 ABQB 798) Indexed As: Ford Credit Canada Ltd. v. Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. et al. Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Judicial District of Edmonton Thomas, J. December 10, Summary: Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada. In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed. The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings. This decision dealt with three outstanding motions, namely: (a) the application by the trustee for an order approving the en bloc sale of the assets of the Welcome Ford dealership, including the DSSA; (b) the application by the trustee pursuant to s of the BIA for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings; and (c) the outstanding applications by Ford Motor for, inter alia, declarations that the DSSA was a "personal contract" not capable of being assigned without the consent of Ford Motor and also for an order lifting the stay of proceedings imposed by the Receivership Order to allow Ford Motor to terminate the DSSA. The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench resolved the applications as follows: (a) the Ford Motor application for a declaration that the trustee did not have any right, title and interest in or to the DSSA was refused; (b) the Ford Motor application for a declaration that the DSSA was a "personal contract" and was not capable of being assigned was refused; (c) the alternative application by Ford Motor for an order declaring that the trustee could not assign the DSSA or transfer the assets of Welcome Ford to any prospective purchaser without the consent of Ford Motor was dismissed; (d) the renewed applications for an order lifting the stay of proceedings imposed by the Receivership Order and s. 69.3(1) of the BIA, and to allow Ford Motor to terminate the DSSA between it and Welcome Ford in accordance with its terms were dismissed; (e) the application by the Trustee pursuant to s of the BIA for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership proceedings was directed, and (f) the trustee's application / recommendation for the en bloc sale of the Welcome Ford dealership was granted and confirmed. Bankruptcy - Topic Property of bankrupt - Particular property - Contracts to which bankrupt is a party (incl. assignment of) - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench discussed the recently amended s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act - The court held that "the intention of the recently adopted s is to protect and enhance the assets of the estate of a bankrupt by
2 allowing the assignment of existing agreements to third parties for value.... Section 84.1 is remedial legislation and should be interpreted in that context." - See paragraphs 38 to 49. Bankruptcy - Topic Property of bankrupt - Particular property - Contracts to which bankrupt is a party (incl. assignment of) - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA was a personal contract which was not capable of assignment - Ford Motor further asserted that the nature and character of the DSSA was such that it could not be assigned and s was of no assistance to the trustee - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the DSSA was not a personal contract, which by its nature could not usefully be performed by another - It was a rather standard commercial franchise which could be performed by virtually any business person and entity with some capital and experience in automotive retailing - The DSSA was capable of assignment and the exclusion in s. 84.1(3) of the BIA did not apply - See paragraphs 50 to 73. Bankruptcy - Topic Property of bankrupt - Particular property - Contracts to which bankrupt is a party (incl. assignment of) - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA should not be assigned at all, and in any event, without its consent - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the DSSA was capable of being assigned and that the exemption found in s. 84.1(3) was not applicable - The outstanding questions were whether the proposed assignee, particularly the preferred assignee, was "able to perform the obligations" contained in the DSSA (s. 84.1(4)(a)) and whether it was appropriate to "assign the rights and obligations to that person" (s.84.1(4)(b)) - The answer to both questions was yes - Ford Motor had unreasonably refused its consent - The preferred assignee would be capable of performing the obligations imposed in the DSSA - Further, the rights and remedies of Ford Motor under the DSSA would be preserved and for that reason it was appropriate to order the assignment - See paragraphs 74 to 96. Contracts - Topic 3730 Performance or breach - Fundamental breach - What constitutes a fundamental breach - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010,
3 an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that the appointment of a receiver in January 14 was a fundamental breach - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - The receiver had at all times been willing to honour the DSSA and its commercial purpose but had not been able to do so primarily because of the conduct of and the positions taken by Ford Motor - There was no fundamental breach because the receiver, which stood in the place of Welcome Ford, had always been willing and had done its best to maintain the value of the dealership, including the DSSA - See paragraphs 17 to 20. Contracts - Topic 3730 Performance or breach - Fundamental breach - What constitutes a fundamental breach - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that the "shuttering" of the Welcome Ford premises on January 13, 2010, deprived Ford Motor of the benefit of the DSSA - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - While the Welcome Ford dealership had not been operating since mid-january 2010 that was not for lack of effort on the part of the receiver which had been trying from the outset to effect a sale of the assets of Welcome Ford en bloc - The Receiver had been met at every step by resistance from Ford Motor - The consistent efforts by Ford Motor to block any sale of Welcome Ford, including the DSSA, led the court to conclude that no fundamental breaches existed here which would lead to the termination of the contract - See paragraphs 21 to 27. Contracts - Topic 3730 Performance or breach - Fundamental breach - What constitutes a fundamental breach - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the
4 Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that Welcome Ford had engaged in conduct unbecoming a reputable business person which in the opinion of Ford Motor adversely affected the operation and business of Welcome Ford and the good name, goodwill and reputation of Ford Motor - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - The court was not satisfied that Ford Motor had brought sufficient evidence to establish fraud or anything close to fraud on the part of Welcome Ford - Further, there was no convincing evidence of damage to the reputation of Ford Motor - In the result, the court was not prepared to find a fundamental breach in respect to this set of assertions - See paragraphs 28 to 36. Franchises - Topic 2022 Franchise agreement - Breach of agreement - What constitutes - [See all Contracts - Topic 3730]. Franchises - Topic 2201 Franchise agreement - Termination - General - [See all Contracts - Topic 3730]. Franchises - Topic 7011 Transfer of franchises - General - By assignment - [See all Bankruptcy - Topic 427.1]. Statutes - Topic 8506 Remedial statutes - General principles - Interpretation - [See first Bankruptcy - Topic 427.1]. Cases Noticed: Shelanu Inc. v. Print Three Franchising Corp. (2003), 172 O.A.C. 78; 38 B.L.R.(3d) 42; 2003 CarswellOnt 2038 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 18]. Canadian Western Bank v Alberta Ltd. et al. (2009), 472 A.R. 297; 2009 ABQB 271, refd to. [para. 22]. Pioneer Ford Sales Inc., Re (1983), 26 B.R. 116, refd to. [para. 44]. Pioneer Ford Sales Inc., Re (1983), 30 B.R. 458, refd to. [para. 44]. Pioneer Ford Sales Inc., Re (1983), 729 F.2d 27 (U.S.C.A., 1st Cir.), refd to. [para. 44]. Wills Motors Inc., Re (1991), 133 B.R. 303 (U.S. Bktcy. Ct. N.Y.), refd to. [para. 46]. Adelphia Communications Corp. et al., Re (2007), 359 B.R. 65 (N.Y.), refd to. [para. 47]. Royal Bank of Canada et al. v. Fracmaster Ltd. (1999), 245 A.R. 138; 1999 ABQB 425, refd to. [para. 51]. Blackhawk Mining Inc. v. Provincial Assessor (Man.) et al. (2002), 163 Man.R.(2d) 215; 269 W.A.C. 215; 2002 MBCA 51, refd to. [para. 56]. Devon Canada Corp. v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co. et al., [2009] A.R. Uned. 233; 2009 ABQB 143, refd to. [para. 60]. Rodaro et al. v. Royal Bank of Canada et al. (2002), 157 O.A.C. 203; 59 O.R.(3d) 74 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 60]. Struik v. Dixie Lee Food Systems Ltd., [2006] O.T.C. 749; 2006 CarswellOnt 4932 (Sup.
5 Ct.), refd to. [para. 64]. Playdium Entertainment Corp. et al., Re, [2001] O.T.C. 828; 31 C.B.R.(4th) 302, additional reasons (2001), 31 C.B.R.(4th) 309 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 76]. Bakerview Trout Farm (1983) Ltd. v. Petgus Holding Ltd. et al., [1996] B.C.T.C. Uned. 698; [1996] B.C.W.L.D (S.C.), refd to. [para. 81]. Statutes Noticed: Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3, sect [para. 41]. Authors and Works Noticed: Houlden, Lloyd W., Morawetz, Geoffrey B., and Sarra, Janis P., Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law of Canada (4th Ed.), vol. 2, p [para. 48]. Counsel: Jeremy H. Hockin and Bryan Maruyama (Parlee McLaws LLP), for the receiver of Welcome Ford, Myers, Norris, Penny Ltd.; Ken Mills and Kelly J. Bourassa (Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP), for Ford Motor Company; Darren R. Bieganek (Duncan & Craig LLP), for the plaintiff, Ford Credit Canada; Ray C. Rutman (Fraser Milner Casgrain LLP), for Bank of Montreal. These applications were heard on June 29, 2010, before Thomas, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following memorandum of judgment on December 10, Editor: Anick Ouellette-Levesque Order accordingly. Franchises - Topic 2022 Franchise agreement - Breach of agreement - What constitutes - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that the appointment of a receiver in January 14 was a fundamental breach - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - The receiver had at all times been willing to honour the DSSA and its commercial purpose but had not been able to do so primarily because of the conduct of and the positions taken by Ford Motor - There was no fundamental breach because the
6 receiver, which stood in the place of Welcome Ford, had always been willing and had done its best to maintain the value of the dealership, including the DSSA - See paragraphs 17 to 20. Franchises - Topic 2022 Franchise agreement - Breach of agreement - What constitutes - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that the "shuttering" of the Welcome Ford premises on January 13, 2010, deprived Ford Motor of the benefit of the DSSA - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - While the Welcome Ford dealership had not been operating since mid-january 2010 that was not for lack of effort on the part of the receiver which had been trying from the outset to effect a sale of the assets of Welcome Ford en bloc - The Receiver had been met at every step by resistance from Ford Motor - The consistent efforts by Ford Motor to block any sale of Welcome Ford, including the DSSA, led the court to conclude that no fundamental breaches existed here which would lead to the termination of the contract - See paragraphs 21 to 27. Franchises - Topic 2022 Franchise agreement - Breach of agreement - What constitutes - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that Welcome Ford had engaged in conduct unbecoming a reputable business person which in the opinion of Ford Motor adversely affected the operation and business of Welcome Ford and the good name, goodwill and reputation of Ford Motor - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - The court was not satisfied that Ford Motor had brought sufficient evidence to establish fraud or anything close to fraud on the part of Welcome Ford - Further, there was no convincing evidence of damage to the reputation of Ford Motor - In the result, the court was not prepared to find a fundamental breach in respect to this set of assertions - See paragraphs 28 to 36.
7 Franchises - Topic 2201 Franchise agreement - Termination - General - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that the appointment of a receiver in January 14 was a fundamental breach - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - The receiver had at all times been willing to honour the DSSA and its commercial purpose but had not been able to do so primarily because of the conduct of and the positions taken by Ford Motor - There was no fundamental breach because the receiver, which stood in the place of Welcome Ford, had always been willing and had done its best to maintain the value of the dealership, including the DSSA - See paragraphs 17 to 20. Franchises - Topic 2201 Franchise agreement - Termination - General - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that the "shuttering" of the Welcome Ford premises on January 13, 2010, deprived Ford Motor of the benefit of the DSSA - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - While the Welcome Ford dealership had not been operating since mid-january 2010 that was not for lack of effort on the part of the receiver which had been trying from the outset to effect a sale of the assets of Welcome Ford en bloc - The Receiver had been met at every step by resistance from Ford Motor - The consistent efforts by Ford Motor to block any sale of Welcome Ford, including the DSSA, led the court to conclude that no fundamental breaches existed here which would lead to the termination of the contract - See paragraphs 21 to 27. Franchises - Topic 2201 Franchise agreement - Termination - General - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to
8 s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA had been "fundamentally breached" with the legal consequence that the franchise agreement represented by the DSSA between Ford Motor and Welcome Ford had been terminated - Accordingly, the DSSA could not be assigned to a third party - Ford Motor asserted that Welcome Ford had engaged in conduct unbecoming a reputable business person which in the opinion of Ford Motor adversely affected the operation and business of Welcome Ford and the good name, goodwill and reputation of Ford Motor - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench rejected the assertion - The court was not satisfied that Ford Motor had brought sufficient evidence to establish fraud or anything close to fraud on the part of Welcome Ford - Further, there was no convincing evidence of damage to the reputation of Ford Motor - In the result, the court was not prepared to find a fundamental breach in respect to this set of assertions - See paragraphs 28 to 36. Franchises - Topic 7011 Transfer of franchises - General - By assignment - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench discussed the recently amended s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act - The court held that "the intention of the recently adopted s is to protect and enhance the assets of the estate of a bankrupt by allowing the assignment of existing agreements to third parties for value.... Section 84.1 is remedial legislation and should be interpreted in that context." - See paragraphs 38 to 49. Franchises - Topic 7011 Transfer of franchises - General - By assignment - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA was a personal contract which was not capable of assignment - Ford Motor further asserted that the nature and character of the DSSA was such that it could not be assigned and s was of no assistance to the trustee - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the DSSA was not a personal contract, which by its nature could not usefully be performed by another - It was a rather standard commercial franchise which could be performed by virtually any business person and entity with some capital and experience in automotive retailing - The DSSA was capable of assignment and the exclusion in s. 84.1(3) of the BIA did not apply - See paragraphs 50 to 73. Franchises - Topic 7011 Transfer of franchises - General - By assignment - Welcome Ford Sales Ltd. operated a Ford vehicle dealership under a Dealership Sales and Services Agreement (DSSA) with Ford Motor Company of Canada - In May 2010, an order was granted declaring
9 Welcome Ford to be bankrupt and a receiver/trustee was appointed - The trustee applied pursuant to s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act for an order assigning the rights and obligations of Welcome Ford under the DSSA to the party that was ultimately the successful bidder for the assets of Welcome Ford in the Receivership Proceedings - Ford Motor asserted that the DSSA should not be assigned at all, and in any event, without its consent - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that the DSSA was capable of being assigned and that the exemption found in s. 84.1(3) was not applicable - The outstanding questions were whether the proposed assignee, particularly the preferred assignee, was "able to perform the obligations" contained in the DSSA (s. 84.1(4)(a)) and whether it was appropriate to "assign the rights and obligations to that person" (s.84.1(4)(b)) - The answer to both questions was yes - Ford Motor had unreasonably refused its consent - The preferred assignee would be capable of performing the obligations imposed in the DSSA - Further, the rights and remedies of Ford Motor under the DSSA would be preserved and for that reason it was appropriate to order the assignment - See paragraphs 74 to 96. Statutes - Topic 8506 Remedial statutes - General principles - Interpretation - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench discussed the recently amended s of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act - The court held that "the intention of the recently adopted s is to protect and enhance the assets of the estate of a bankrupt by allowing the assignment of existing agreements to third parties for value.... Section 84.1 is remedial legislation and should be interpreted in that context." - See paragraphs 38 to 49.
Indexed As: Siena-Foods Ltd. (Bankrupt) v. Old Republic Insurance Co. of Canada et al.
Siena-Foods Limited, a Bankrupt, by its Trustee Deloitte & Touche Inc. (applicant/appellant) v. Old Republic Insurance Company of Canada and Intact Insurance Company (respondents/respondent) (C54769; 2012
More informationIndexed As: McCann et al. v. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. et al. Ontario Court of Appeal Doherty, Laskin and Simmons, JJ.A. April 18, 2012.
Nicole Lacroix and Rosie Ladouceur (plaintiffs/appellants) v. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and Marc Rochon, Claude Poirier-Defoy, Jim Millar, Karen Kinsley, Gerald Norbraten, Jean-Guy Tanguay,
More informationIndexed As: Gimbel et al. v. Alberta (Minister of Public Works, Supply and Services)
Howard Vance Gimbel, Judith Anne Gimbel and Carl Management Ltd. (appellants/claimants) v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta, as Represented by the Minister of Public Works, Supply & Services (Now
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - COMMERCIAL LIST IN THE MATTER OF RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY
Court File No. 01-CL-4313 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - COMMERCIAL LIST IN THE MATTER OF RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY AND IN THE MATTER OF THE INSURANCE COMPANIES ACT, S.C. 1991, C.47, AS AMENDED AND
More informationHoulden & Morawetz On-Line Newsletter
2011 23 Houlden & Morawetz On-Line Newsletter Date: June 6, 2011 Headlines The Alberta Court of Appeal considered a situation where the receiver paid occupation rent and the trustee never went into occupation.
More informationIndexed As: Kimoto et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. Federal Court of Appeal Evans, Layden-Stevenson and Stratas, JJ.A. October 19, 2011.
Doug Kimoto, Vic Amos and West Coast Trollers (Area G) Association on behalf of all Area G Troll Licence Holders (appellants) v. The Attorney General of Canada, Gulf Trollers Association (Area H) and Area
More informationChapter 11 and CCAA. » A Cross-Border Comparison
Chapter 11 and CCAA» A Cross-Border Comparison TORONTO CALGARY VANCOUVER MONTRÉAL OTTAWA NEW YORK LONDON RIYADH/AL-KHOBAR* BAHRAIN BEIJING Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP *Associated Offices blakes.com Chapter
More informationthe imposition of a duty of fair dealing on all parties to the franchise agreement; and
Lawyers, Patent & Trade-mark Agents 150 York Street, Suite 800 Toronto ON M5H 3S5 Tel: 416.364.1553 Fax: 416.364.1453 Canadian Franchise Legislation: An Overview 1 A. Introduction David Kornhauser dkornhauser@msmlaw.ca
More informationIndexed As: Walker v. British Columbia Securities Commission
Andrew Gordon Walker (appellant) v. British Columbia (Securities Commission) (respondent) (CA038350; 2011 BCCA 415) Indexed As: Walker v. British Columbia Securities Commission British Columbia Court of
More informationSUPERIOR COURT (Commercial Division) AMERICAN APPAREL CANADA RETAIL INC. - and - AMERICAN APPAREL CANADA WHOLESALE INC. - and - KPMG INC.
CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL SUPERIOR COURT (Commercial Division) IN THE MATTERS OF THE NOTICE OF INTENTION OF: N : 500-11- 051625-164 AMERICAN APPAREL CANADA RETAIL INC. - and - N :
More informationNOTICE TO DEFENDANTS
CANADA ) PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN ) Q.B.G. No. 1305 of 2012 IN THE QUEEN'S BENCH JUDICIAL CENTRE OF SASKATOON IN THE MATTER OF THE RECEIVERSHIP OF BIG SKY FARMS INC., BIG SKY FARMS I LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,
More informationHoulden & Morawetz On-Line Newsletter
2012 08 Houlden & Morawetz On-Line Newsletter Date: February 20, 2012 Headlines The Ontario Superior Court of Justice granted a receivership order and dismissed the debtors cross application for an initial
More informationNo Surcharge for You: Third Circuit Rules That Section 506(c) Surcharge Is "Sharply Limited" January/February Lauren M. Buonome Mark G.
No Surcharge for You: Third Circuit Rules That Section 506(c) Surcharge Is "Sharply Limited" January/February 2014 Lauren M. Buonome Mark G. Douglas The ability to "surcharge" a secured creditor's collateral
More informationIndexed As: Workers' Compensation Board (P.E.I.) v. J & B Administrative Services Inc.
Workers' Compensation Board of Prince Edward Island (appellant) v. J & B Administrative Services Inc. (respondent) and Workers' Compensation Appeal Tribunal (respondent) (S1-CA-1262; 2014 PECA 2) Indexed
More informationBANKRUPTCY AND RESTRUCTURING
BANKRUPTCY AND RESTRUCTURING Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) 161 Companies Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) 165 By James Gage Bankruptcy and Restructuring 161 Under Canadian constitutional law, the
More informationYugraneft v. Rexx Management: Limitation periods under the New York Convention A Case Comment by Paul M. Lalonde & Mark Hines*
Yugraneft v. Rexx Management: Limitation periods under the New York Convention A Case Comment by Paul M. Lalonde & Mark Hines* Prepared for the Canadian Bar Association National Section on International
More informationAppendices Receivership Order... A Receiver s Third Report to Court (without appendices)... B Reserve Agreement... C
Ninth Report of Duff & Phelps Canada Restructuring Inc. as Court-Appointed Receiver of Priszm Income Fund, Priszm Canadian Operating Trust, Priszm Inc., KIT Finance Inc. and Priszm LP June 26, 2014 Contents
More informationHomeaway.com, Inc. (applicant) v. Martin Hrdlicka (respondent) (T ; 2012 FC 1467) Indexed As: Homeaway.com Inc. v. Hrdlicka
Homeaway.com, Inc. (applicant) v. Martin Hrdlicka (respondent) (T-1497-12; 2012 FC 1467) Indexed As: Homeaway.com Inc. v. Hrdlicka Federal Court Hughes, J. December 12, 2012. Summary: HomeAway.com Inc.,
More informationCanada: Insolvency and Restructuring Law Overview
Canada: Insolvency and Restructuring Law Overview Stikeman Elliott LLP Canada: Insolvency and Restructuring Law Overview Legislative Framework... 2 Liquidation Regimes... 2 Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act...
More informationRErt JUN JUDICIAL CEN-I Wt OF CALGARY
Clerk's stamp: RErt JUN 0 8 2017 JUDICIAL CEN-I Wt OF CALGARY j COURT FILE NO. COURT JUDICIAL CENTRE PLAINTIFF DEFENDANTS DOCUMENT ADDRESS FOR SERVICE AND CONTACT INFORMATION OF PARTY FILING THIS DOCUMENT
More informationMILLENNIUM STIMULATION SERVICES LTD. SECOND REPORT TO THE COURT SUBMITTED BY
COURT FILE NUMBER 1601-04111 COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL CENTRE CALGARY PLAINTIFF ALBERTA TREASURY BRANCHES DEFENDANT MILLENNIUM STIMULATION SERVICES LTD. APPLICANT KPMG INC., IN ITS CAPACITY
More informationTable of Contents Page
Table of Contents Page 1. INTRODUCTION... 4 2. ACTIVITIES OF THE COMPANY SINCE THE CCAA FILING DATE... 8 3. ACTIVITIES OF THE MONITOR SINCE THE CCAA FILING DATE... 9 4. CASH FLOW FORECAST... 10 5. SALE
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL LIST
Court File No. CV-18-594590-00CL ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL LIST IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 243(1) OF THE BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT, R.S.C. 1985, C. B-3, AS AMENDED AND SECTION 101
More informationTo the Creditors of Whitemud Resources Inc. ( Whitemud or the Company ) - Proposal
April 29, 2011 Deloitte & Touche Inc. 700 Bankers Court 850 2 nd Street SW Calgary AB T2P 0R8 Canada Tel: 403-298-5955 Fax: 403-718-3696 www.deloitte.ca To the Creditors of Whitemud Resources Inc. ( Whitemud
More informationSUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE (Commercial List)
ONTARIO Court File No. 05-CL-5801 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE (Commercial List) IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, R.S.C. 1985, c.c-36, AS AMENDED AND IN THE MATTER OF A PLAN OF COMPROMISE
More informationCitation: Korsch v. Human Rights Commission Date: (Man.) et al., 2012 MBCA 108 Docket: AI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA
Citation: Korsch v. Human Rights Commission Date: 20121113 (Man.) et al., 2012 MBCA 108 Docket: AI 12-30-07792 Coram: B E T W E E N : IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF MANITOBA Madam Justice Barbara M. Hamilton
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA GERRY DUPAS FRASER MILNER CASGRAIN LLP
COURT FILE NUMBER 1101-09473 COURT JUDICIAL CENTRE PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA CALGARY GERRY DUPAS PHILLIP PINCUS, in his capacity as Trustee of the PLATINUM INVESTMENT TRUST
More informationIndexed As: Masterpiece Inc. v. Alavida Lifestyles Inc.
Masterpiece Inc. (appellant) v. Alavida Lifestyles Inc. (respondent) and International Trademark Association (intervenor) (33459; 2011 SCC 27; 2011 CSC 27) Indexed As: Masterpiece Inc. v. Alavida Lifestyles
More informationIndexed As: Information Commissioner (Can.) v. Canada (Minister of National Defence)
Information Commissioner of Canada (appellant) v. Minister of National Defence (respondent) and Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Canadian Newspaper Association, Ad IDEM/Canadian Media Lawyers Association
More informationClerk's Stamp: COURT FILE NUMBER COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA J UDICIAL CENTRE EDMONTON PLAINTIFF ROYAL BANK OF CANADA
Clerk's Stamp: COURT FILE NUMBER COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA J UDICIAL CENTRE EDMONTON PLAINTIFF ROYAL BANK OF CANADA DEFENDANTS INDEPENDENT ELECTRIC AND CONTROLS LTD., IEC BUSINESS HOLDINGS INC.,
More informationCanada: Federal Court of Appeal reaffirms existence of common interest privilege outside a litigation context
20 March 2018 Global Tax Alert News from Americas Tax Center Canada: Federal Court of Appeal reaffirms existence of common interest privilege outside a litigation context EY Global Tax Alert Library The
More informationMaritime Broadcasting System Limited (applicant) v. Canadian Media Guild (respondent) (A ; 2014 FCA 59)
Maritime Broadcasting System Limited (applicant) v. Canadian Media Guild (respondent) (A-534-12; 2014 FCA 59) Indexed As: Maritime Broadcasting System Ltd. v. Canadian Media Guild Federal Court of Appeal
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA
Date: 20180510 Docket: CI 17-01-05942 (Winnipeg Centre) Indexed as: Diduck v. Simpson Cited as: 2018 MBQB 76 COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF MANITOBA B E T W E E N: ROBERT DIDUCK, ) Counsel: ) plaintiff, ) DANIEL
More informationSUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Squires v President of Industrial Court Qld [2002] QSC 272 PARTIES: FILE NO: S3990 of 2002 DIVISION: PHILLIP ALAN SQUIRES (applicant/respondent) v PRESIDENT OF INDUSTRIAL
More informationCase Name: Paquette v. TeraGo Networks Inc. Between Trevor Paquette, Plaintiff (Appellant), and TeraGo Networks Inc., Defendant (Respondent)
Page 1 Case Name: Paquette v. TeraGo Networks Inc. Between Trevor Paquette, Plaintiff (Appellant), and TeraGo Networks Inc., Defendant (Respondent) [2016] O.J. No. 4222 2016 ONCA 618 269 A.C.W.S. (3d)
More informationMiller Thomson Seminar April 15, 2009
MILLER THOMSON LLP Barristers & Solicitors Patent & Trade-Mark Agents Robson Court 1000-840 Howe Street Vancouver, BC Canada V6Z 2M1 Tel. 604.687.2242 Fax. 604.643.1200 www.millerthomson.com VANCOUVER
More informationLESA LIBRARY. One Step at a Time: Biz-Income Calculations: Guideline Income Manual for Legal and Accounting Professionals
One Step at a Time: Biz-Income Calculations: Guideline Income Manual for Legal and Accounting Professionals Prepared for: Legal Education Society of Alberta Business Issues in Family Law Matters Presented
More informationHoulden & Morawetz On-Line Newsletter
2012 02 Houlden & Morawetz On-Line Newsletter Date: January 9, 2012 Headlines The Ontario Superior Court of Justice appointed the proposal trustee as interim receiver over the objection of creditors who
More informationS U P E R I O R C O U R T (Commercial Division) CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF QUEBEC S.C.:
CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF QUEBEC DIVISION: 01-MONTREAL S.C.: 500-11-051625-164 500-11-051624-167 IN THE MATTERS OF THE NOTICES OF INTENTION AND OF THE INTERIM RECEIVERSHIP OF: S U P E R I O
More informationCOURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
Citation: Royal Bank of Canada v. Tuxedo Date: 20000710 Transport Ltd. 2000 BCCA 430 Docket: CA025719 Registry: Vancouver COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN: THE ROYAL BANK OF CANADA PETITIONER
More informationPOSEIDON CONCEPTS CORP. SECURITIES LITIGATION NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WITH CERTAIN OF THE DEFENDANTS IN POSEIDON CLASS ACTIONS
1 POSEIDON CONCEPTS CORP. SECURITIES LITIGATION NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT WITH CERTAIN OF THE DEFENDANTS IN POSEIDON CLASS ACTIONS READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AS IT MAY AFFECT YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS THIS
More informationWELCOME TO THE FIRST MEETING OF CREDITORS IN THE CONSOLIDATED BANKRUPTCY OF FACTORCORP INC. AND FACTORCORP FINANCIAL INC.
WELCOME TO THE FIRST MEETING OF CREDITORS IN THE CONSOLIDATED BANKRUPTCY OF FACTORCORP INC. AND FACTORCORP FINANCIAL INC. April 24, 2008 Agenda 1. Call to Order Introduction of Head Table Tabling of prescribed
More informationand TRUSTEE S PRELIMINARY REPORT TO CREDITORS
Deloitte Restructuring Inc. La Tour Deloitte 1190 Avenue des Canadiens-de-Montréal Suite 500 Montreal QC H3B 0M7 Canada Phone: 514-393-7115 Fax: 514-390-4103 www.deloitte.ca C A N A D A PROVINCE OF QUEBEC
More informationManaging Pension Risks in Corporate Insolvencies and Restructurings
Managing Pension Risks in Corporate Insolvencies and Restructurings Elizabeth M. Brown Hicks Morley Hamilton Stewart Storie LLP Gary Nachshen Stikeman Elliott LLP Canadian Institute Toronto January 22,
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL LIST
Court File No. 06-CL-6482 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL LIST IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36, AS AMENDED AND IN THE MATTER OF A PROPOSED PLAN
More informationTHE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA RESIGNATION COMMITTEE REPORT
THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA RESIGNATION COMMITTEE REPORT IN THE MATTER OF THE Legal Profession Act, and in the matter of an Application by Richard Gariepy, a Member of the Law Society of Alberta to Resign
More informationTercon Investments Ltd. et al.
No. S128887 Vancouver Registry Tercon Investments Ltd. et al. SIXTH REPORT OF THE RECEIVER March 11, 2013 No. S128887 Vancouver Registry IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION
More informationIndexed As: Branco v. American Home Assurance Co. et al. Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench Judicial Centre of Saskatoon Acton, J. March 21, 2013.
Luciano Branco (plaintiff) v. American Home Assurance Company, Cameco Corporation, Kumtor Operating Company and Zurich Life Insurance Company Limited (defendants) (2006 Q.B.G. No. 267; 2013 SKQB 98) Indexed
More informationChapter 11. I, Michael Creber, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, hereby declare under penalty of perjury
PACHULSKI STANG ZIEHL & JONES LLP Robert J. Feinstein, Esq. Gabrielle A. Rohwer, Esq. 780 Third Avenue, 36 th Floor New York, NY 10017 Telephone: 212.561.7700 Facsimile: 212.561.7777 Counsel for Grant
More informationREPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON DERIVATIVES
REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON DERIVATIVES The Insolvency Institute of Canada ( IIC ) Task Force on Derivatives (the Task Force ) respectfully submits this report on behalf of the leading organization of
More informationAdvising the Trustee: The Lawyer s Role in the Case of Fraud. Mervyn D. Abramowitz C.S.*
Advising the Trustee: The Lawyer s Role in the Case of Fraud Mervyn D. Abramowitz C.S.* INTRODUCTION You are at your desk. An email flashes across your screen. One of the bankruptcy trustees you have recently
More informationCOURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA
COURT FILE NUMBER 25-1859192 COURT JUDICIAL CENTRE DOCUMENT COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA CALGARY FIRST REPORT OF THE TRUSTEE IN THE MATTER OF THE NOTICE OF INTENTION TO MAKE A PROPOSAL OF 3 EAU CLAIRE
More informationTrident Procedures for the Sale and Investor Solicitation Process
Trident Procedures for the Sale and Investor Solicitation Process On September 8, 2009, Trident Exploration Corp. ( TEC ), certain of its Canadian subsidiaries (Fort Energy Corp., Fenergy Corp., 981384
More informationCase JAD Doc 22 Filed 09/30/16 Entered 09/30/16 16:50:46 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11
Case 16-23458-JAD Doc 22 Filed 09/30/16 Entered 09/30/16 16:50:46 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: ) Case No. 16-23458-JAD
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JU.S.TICE COMMERCIAL LIST. IN THE MATTER OF MAPLE BANK GmbH
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JU.S.TICE COMMERCIAL LIST Court File No. CV-16-11290-00CL IN THE MATTER OF MAPLE BANK GmbH AND IN THE MATTER OF THE WINDING-UP AND RESTRUCTURING ACT, R.S.C. 1985, C.W-11, AS AMENDED
More informationMOTION FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A RECEIVER (Section 243 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 ("BIA"))
CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL No.: 500-11-053409-179 540-11-009942-170 SUPERIOR COURT (Commercial Division) IN THE MATTER OF THE RECEIVERSHIP OF: ARTEMANO CANADA INC., a legal person having
More informationCANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION ALBERTA LAW CONFERENCE EDMONTON, ALBERTA TEETERING ON THE BRINK - STRATEGIES AVAILABLE WHEN YOUR CLIENT IS FACING INSOLVENCY
CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION ALBERTA LAW CONFERENCE EDMONTON, ALBERTA TEETERING ON THE BRINK - STRATEGIES AVAILABLE WHEN YOUR CLIENT IS FACING INSOLVENCY January 28th, 2011 Presented by: Susan L. Robinson
More informationInsurance Bad Faith MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT. A commentary article reprinted from the November 24, 2010 issue of Mealey s Litigation Report:
MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT Insurance Bad Faith Pitfalls For The Unwary: The Use Of Releases To Preserve Or Extinguish Any Potential Bad-Faith Claims Between The Primary And Excess Insurance Carriers by
More information- 2 - litigation, or an order requiring Ann Capponi to post a bond pursuant to Rule 74.11, an order that the Estate Trustee be entitled to sell assets
COURT FILE NO.: CV-07-1576-00 DATE: 20070910 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE B E T W E E N: HSBC BANK CANADA Applicant - and - ANN CAPPONI, Estate Trustee of the Estate of Ronald Joseph Capponi Janet
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL LIST
Court File No. 06-CL-6482 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE COMMERCIAL LIST IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36, AS AMENDED AND IN THE MATTER OF A PROPOSED PLAN
More informationEmployee Claims in Canadian Insolvency Proceedings. September 15, Linc A. Rogers, Blake, Cassels & Graydon, Chicago Office
Employee Claims in Canadian Insolvency Proceedings September 15, 2006 Linc A. Rogers, Blake, Cassels & Graydon, Chicago Office Background Canada s largest and most complicated restructuring proceedings
More informationRestructuring and Insolvency Doing Business In Canada
Restructuring and Insolvency Doing Business In Canada Restructuring and insolvency law in Canada is primarily governed by two pieces of federal legislation: the Companies Creditors Arrangement Act (the
More informationTHE EFFECT OF THE 2005 BANKRUPTCY CODE AMENDMENTS ON PERSONAL PROPERTY SECURED TRANSACTIONS IN BUSINESS CASES
THE EFFECT OF THE 2005 BANKRUPTCY CODE AMENDMENTS ON PERSONAL PROPERTY SECURED TRANSACTIONS IN BUSINESS CASES Gabriel R. Safar and Edwin E. Smith Bingham McCutchen LLP November 8, 2005 The Bankruptcy Abuse
More informationNOTE: This consolidation is not official. Amendments have been incorporated for convenience of reference and the original statutes and regulations
MONTREAL TRUST COMPANY OF CANADA c. 105 1 Montreal Trust Company of Canada Act being a Private Act Chapter 105 of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1980-81 (effective May 19, 1981). NOTE: This consolidation
More informationSOUTHEASTERN BANKRUPTCY LAW INSTITUTE: THIRTY-FIRST ANNUAL SEMINAR ON BANKRUPTCY LAW. SECTION 506(c) SURCHARGE OF COLLATERAL
SOUTHEASTERN BANKRUPTCY LAW INSTITUTE: THIRTY-FIRST ANNUAL SEMINAR ON BANKRUPTCY LAW SECTION 506(c) SURCHARGE OF COLLATERAL Presented by Honorable Allan L. Gropper United States Bankruptcy Judge United
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON EUGENE DIVISION
DAVID R. ZARO (California Bar No. 124334) STEPHEN S. WALTERS (OSB No. 80120) FRANCIS N. SCOLLAN (California Bar No. 186262) ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP Three Embarcadero Center, 12th
More informationShivanne Cortes-Goolcharran sues Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates, P.C. ( Rosicki ), and Fay Servicing, LLC ( Fay ), under the Fair Debt Collection
Case 1:17-cv-03976-FB-SJB Document 32 Filed 08/07/18 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 600 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ------------------------------------------------x SHIVANNE CORTES-
More informationIN THE COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH FOR SASKATCHEWAN JUDICIAL CENTRE OF SASKATOON IN BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY
File No. BK 22-2353460 IN THE COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH FOR SASKATCHEWAN JUDICIAL CENTRE OF SASKATOON IN BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY IN THE MATTER OF THE BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT, R.S.C 1985, C.B-3, AS
More informationCITATION: Tree-Techol Tree Technology v. Via Rail Canada Inc., 2017 ONSC 755 COURT FILE NO.: DATE:
CITATION: Tree-Techol Tree Technology v. Via Rail Canada Inc., 2017 ONSC 755 COURT FILE NO.: 14-45810 DATE: 2017-02-01 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO RE: BEFORE: TREE-TECHOL TREE TECHNOLOGY AND RESEARCH
More informationRequirements made under the Membership Byelaw
Chapter 4 Requirements made under the Membership Byelaw Admission to membership Part A of the Membership Byelaw Categories of membership paragraph 2 of the Membership Byelaw 1. Within the category of non-underwriting
More informationONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE (COMMERCIAL LIST)
Court File No: 35-2227642 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE (COMMERCIAL LIST) IN THE MATTER OF THE NOTICE OF INTENTION TO MAKE A PROPOSAL OF STEVE S T.V. & APPLIANCES LIMITED OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER IN
More informationNarrowing the Scope of Auditor Duties
Narrowing the Scope of Auditor Duties David Margulies, J.D. Candidate 2010 The tort of deepening insolvency refers to an action asserted by a representative of a bankruptcy estate against directors, officers,
More informationFREEHOLD MINERAL RIGHTS TAX ACT
Province of Alberta FREEHOLD MINERAL RIGHTS TAX ACT Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 Chapter F-26 Current as of November 30, 2015 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re: MARK RICHARD LIPPOLD, Debtor. 1 FOR PUBLICATION Chapter 7 Case No. 11-12300 (MG) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF
More informationCommercial Landlord/Tenant Law when Tenant Declares Bankruptcy and (non-commercial) Summary Proceedings
Commercial Landlord/Tenant Law when Tenant Declares Bankruptcy and (non-commercial) Summary Proceedings Bankruptcy Concerns When a Commercial Tenant Files Bankruptcy All collection actions must stop as
More informationPeace Hills Trust Co. v. Canada Deposit Insurance Corp.
Page 1 Peace Hills Trust Co. v. Canada Deposit Insurance Corp. Between Peace Hills Trust Company and Carry the Kettle First Nation Trustees of the Trust Created out of the Carry the Kettle First Nation
More informationIN THE MATTER OF A PLAN OF COMPROMISE OR ARRANGEMENT OF WALTER ENERGY CANADA HOLDINGS, INC. AND THE OTHER PETITIONERS LISTED ON SCHEDULE "A"
BCSC File No. S-1510120 Vancouver Registry IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES' CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36, AS AMENDED, IN THE MATTER OF THE BUSINESS
More informationNOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL
Court of Appeal File No. Supreme Court File No. 5126583 Supreme Court Registry: Vancouver COURT OF APPEAL IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, R.S.C. 1985, c. C36 AND IN THE MATTER
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division IN RE: ) ) Bankruptcy Case MOVIE GALLERY, INC., et al., ) No. 07-33849-DOT ) Chapter 11 Debtors. ) Jointly Administered OBJECTION
More informationSUPERIOR COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION)
Canada Province of Qu6bec District of Montreal No : 500-11-049838-150 Date : June 20, 2018 SUPERIOR COURT (COMMERCIAL DIVISION) Presiding: The Honourable David R. Collier, S.C.J. In the matter of the Companies'
More informationDATED FEBRUARY 4, Counsel. Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP 1600, 421 7th Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2P 4K9 Attention: Jeffrey Oliver.
COURT FILE NUMBER 1501-00955 COURT JUDICIAL CENTRE DOCUMENT COURT OF QUEEN S BENCH OF ALBERTA CALGARY THIRTEENTH REPORT OF THE MONITOR IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, R.S.C. 1985
More informationand 3. The Company has its operations in Morin-Heights and is leasing its premises from an affiliated company, Canada Inc. ( 3522 ).
Deloitte Restructuring Inc. La Tour Deloitte 1190 Avenue des Canadiens-de-Montréal Suite 500 Montreal QC H3B 0M7 Canada Tel.: 514-393-7115 Fax: 514-390-4103 www.deloitte.ca C A N A D A PROVINCE OF QUEBEC
More informationFraudulent Misrepresentation To Receivers and Beyond: Meridian Credit Union Limited v Baig
Fraudulent Misrepresentation To Receivers and Beyond: Meridian Credit Union Limited v Baig The Ontario Court of Appeal in Meridian Credit Union Limited v Baig 1 made it clear that misinforming a receiver
More informationResponding to Allegations of Bad Faith
Responding to Allegations of Bad Faith Matthew M. Haar Saul Ewing LLP 2 N. Second Street, 7th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17101 (717) 257-7508 mhaar@saul.com Matthew M. Haar is a litigation attorney in Saul Ewing
More informationCorporate Insolvency and Restructuring
Get valuable insights from over 20 top Canadian and US experts The Advanced Program in Corporate Insolvency and Restructuring Attend this timely program and get practical updates on key issues, including:
More informationRECEIVER S MOTION TO APPROVE FORBEARANCE AGREEMENT WITH AFF II DENVER, LLC. Harvey Sender, the duly-appointed receiver ( Receiver ) for Gary Dragul
DISTRICT COURT, DENVER COUNTY, STATE OF COLORADO Denver District Court 1437 Bannock St. Denver, CO 80202 (720) 865-8612 Plaintiff: Gerald Rome, Securities Commissioner for the State of Colorado v. Defendants:
More informationJim Bronskill (applicant) v. Minister of Canadian Heritage (respondent) and Information Commissioner of Canada (intervener) (T ; 2011 FC 983)
Jim Bronskill (applicant) v. Minister of Canadian Heritage (respondent) and Information Commissioner of Canada (intervener) (T-1680-09; 2011 FC 983) Indexed As: Bronskill v. Canada (Minister of Canadian
More information"NON-GOVERNMENTAL STATUTORY TRUSTS
"NON-GOVERNMENTAL STATUTORY TRUSTS IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS IN CANADA" A PAPER PRESENTED AT THE CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION 11 TH ANNUAL PAN CANADIAN INSOLVENCY AND RESTRUCTURING LAW CONFERENCE PRESENTED
More informationCase Name: Taggart v. Canada Life Assurance Co.
Page 1 Case Name: Taggart v. Canada Life Assurance Co. Between Fred Taggart, respondent, (plaintiff), and The Canada Life Assurance Company, appellant, (defendant) [2006] O.J. No. 310 50 C.C.P.B. 163 [2006]
More informationThe Dow Chemical Company ( TDCC ) (on behalf of itself and its business unit, Dow
Anne M. Aaronson (AA1679) DILWORTH PAXSON LLP 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102-2101 Telephone: (215) 575-7000 Facsimile: (215) 575-7200 Anne Marie P. Kelley Scott J. Freedman
More informationFACTUM OF THE APPLICANT
Court File No. ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE (COMMERCIAL LIST) IN THE MATTER OF COMPANIES CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36, AS AMENDED AND IN THE MATTER OF A PLAN OF COMPROMISE OR ARRANGEMENT
More informationNEW YORK STATE REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PLACEMENT OF EXCESS/SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE. Eric A. Portuguese, Esq. Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer, LLP
NEW YORK STATE REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE PLACEMENT OF EXCESS/SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE by Eric A. Portuguese, Esq. Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer, LLP 111 112 NEW YORK STATE REGULATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE
More informationCANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF QUEBEC DIVISION: 01- Montreal S.C.: SUPER:
CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF QUEBEC DIVISION: 01- Montreal S.C.: 500-11-063292-179 SUPER: 41-2297864 IN THE MATTER OF THE PROPOSAL OF: S U P E R I O R C O U R T (Commercial Division) 175413 CANADA
More informationCase Document 2493 Filed in TXSB on 09/04/13 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 12-36187 Document 2493 Filed in TXSB on 09/04/13 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE: ATP OIL & GAS CORPORATION CASE NO. 12-36187 CHAPTER
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY SOUTHERN DIVISION PIKEVILLE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) *** *** *** ***
Case: 7:15-cv-00096-ART Doc #: 56 Filed: 02/05/16 Page: 1 of 11 - Page ID#: 2240 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY SOUTHERN DIVISION PIKEVILLE In re BLACK DIAMOND MINING COMPANY,
More informationSirius XM Radio Inc. v XL Specialty Ins. Co NY Slip Op 32872(U) November 7, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: O.
Sirius XM Radio Inc. v XL Specialty Ins. Co. 2013 NY Slip Op 32872(U) November 7, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 650831/2013 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,
More informationEmmanuel Phaneuf, M.Sc., CIRP, LIT Partner, R&R Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton & Co L.L.P. Priority claims. September 23, 2017
Emmanuel Phaneuf, M.Sc., CIRP, LIT Partner, R&R Raymond Chabot Grant Thornton & Co L.L.P. September 23, 2017 Table of content Crown Unpaid suppliers / Farmers Employees Others 2 The crown Garnishment Deemed
More informationRoyal Host GP Inc. in its capacity as the general partner of the Royal Host Limited Partnership, Plaintiff ENDORSEMENT
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO CITATION: Royal Host v. 1842259 Ont. Ltd., 2017 ONSC 3982 COURT FILE NO.: 1906/13 DATE: 20170705 RE: BEFORE: COUNSEL: Royal Host GP Inc. in its capacity as the general
More informationSPECIMEN. D&O Elite SM Directors and Officers Liability Insurance. Chubb Group of Insurance Companies 15 Mountain View Road Warren, New Jersey 07059
Chubb Group of Insurance Companies 15 Mountain View Road Warren, New Jersey 07059 D&O Elite SM Directors and Officers Liability Insurance DECLARATIONS FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY A stock insurance company,
More informationCITATION: Lucas-Logan v. Certas Direct Insurance Company, 2017 ONSC 828 COURT FILE NO.: CV DATE: ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
CITATION: Lucas-Logan v. Certas Direct Insurance Company, 2017 ONSC 828 COURT FILE NO.: CV-15-21829 DATE: 20170202 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: Eunice Lucas-Logan Plaintiff and Certas Direct
More information