56 total
The court approved unprecedented class counsel fees totaling over $900 million in the tobacco insolvency proceedings.
This decision concerns three motions to approve class counsel fees in the context of insolvency proceedings under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act involving three major tobacco companies.
The court approved the Quebec Class Action Plaintiffs' counsel fee request of approximately $901 million (representing 22% of the $4.119 billion allocated to the Quebec class members), the Knight Class Counsel fee request of $5 million plus disbursements, and the Tobacco Producers' counsel fee request of $3.75 million.
The court found that the fees were fair and reasonable given the exceptional risks assumed, the unprecedented outcome achieved, and the unique circumstances of the case.
A $50 million reserve was established from the Quebec counsel fees to protect against any pro-rata reduction in class member compensation due to actual take-up rates or other factors.
The court varied a receivership order to significantly reduce frozen assets due to regulatory misconduct in a related U.S. proceeding and investigative delay, while confirming the receiver's authority to share non-privileged data with the Commission.
The Ontario Securities Commission sought the appointment of a receiver over the assets of Traders Global Group Inc. and related entities based on allegations of fraud and unregistered securities trading.
The receiver was appointed in January 2024.
More than nineteen months later, the respondents brought a motion to discharge the receiver, and the receiver sought directions regarding disclosure of data to the Commission.
The court found that significant changes in circumstances had occurred since the appointment, including the dismissal of related U.S. proceedings due to misconduct by CFTC staff whose evidence had supported the receivership appointment, the discovery of a Nova Scotia decision that undermined the novelty of the Commission's legal theory, and substantial delay in the investigation without issuance of an Application for Enforcement Proceeding.
The court granted the respondents' alternative request to vary the appointment order, reducing the frozen assets from tens of millions to $10 million in escrow, while retaining the receiver to administer the escrow and act as intermediary for data disclosure.
The court also confirmed the receiver's authority to share non-privileged data with the Commission under the appointment order.
The court granted an initial CCAA order including interim financing and a lien regularization order.
The applicants, QM GP Inc. and Highpoint Environmental Services Inc., sought an initial order under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act and a lien regularization order.
The applicants sought protection to address acute liquidity crisis, interim financing, and relief to stabilize operations.
The court granted the initial order with certain modifications, approving interim debtor-in-possession financing, appointment of a monitor, administration and directors' charges, and a lien regularization order.
The court also granted a temporary stay on performance bond calls and certain indemnity obligations, with the Kingsdale Letter of Credit issue deferred to the comeback hearing.
The court granted multiple orders in a CCAA proceeding, including property sale approval and the appointment of a mediator for cost allocation disputes.
This endorsement grants several orders sought by the Applicants in ongoing Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceedings, including approval of the Monitor’s reports and activities, amendment of reporting obligations, addition of Block 6 Holding Inc. as an Applicant, approval of a property sale and related distributions, and the appointment of a mediator to address cost allocation issues among financiers.
The court finds all relief appropriate and supported by the record.
The court voided promissory notes and discharged mortgages because the lender materially altered their terms.
The court voided six promissory notes and struck out related mortgages registered by the plaintiffs against the defendants' properties, finding that the notes were materially altered without consent, contrary to the Bills of Exchange Act.
The court also declined to grant equitable mortgages or certificates of pending litigation, citing the plaintiffs' inequitable conduct and failure to meet statutory tests.
The decision addresses issues of forged notes, after-acquired property, corporate personality, and the application of the Family Law Act to matrimonial homes.
The court approved a sales officer's proposed sale process for a deadlocked insurance brokerage and adjourned a motion to appoint a receiver.
This decision concerns the approval of a sale process and a motion to appoint the sales officer as receiver in the context of a deadlocked insurance brokerage business.
The court approves the sale process and related ancillary relief, including the appointment of an interim broker and non-solicitation orders, but dismisses the motion to appoint the sales officer as receiver.
The ruling addresses issues of conflict of interest, compliance with prior orders, and the preservation of assets pending winding up.
The court sanctioned the CCAA plans of major tobacco companies to effect a global settlement.
This decision sanctions the CCAA Plans of Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, Imperial Tobacco Company Limited, JTI-Macdonald Corp., and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc., effecting a global settlement of all tobacco-related claims in Canada.
The court reviews the structure, allocation, and fairness of the plans, including the creation of a $1 billion Cy-près Foundation, and addresses objections from social stakeholders.
The court finds the plans fair, reasonable, and in the public interest, and grants the requested relief, including third-party releases and the appointment of plan administrators.
The court dismissed a motion to imply a term adjusting a contractual payment amount.
Gray Jay Estates Inc. sought a court order to vary the “Payment Amount” under an assignment of indebtedness and security agreement, which would have increased the amount payable by NE SPC II LP (Blacksail) by approximately $1 million.
The dispute centered on whether cash on hand should have been used to repay a DIP facility before closing, and whether a term should be implied into the agreement to require such repayment.
The court found no basis to imply such a term, holding that the contract’s language was clear and that the parties had not agreed to the adjustment sought.
The motion was dismissed, and costs were awarded to Blacksail.
The court confirmed that notice elements in the Claims Procedure Orders were reasonable.
This supplementary endorsement addresses a request from JTI-Macdonald Corp. regarding the adequacy of notice elements in the Claims Procedure Order within the ongoing Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceedings.
The court confirmed its satisfaction that the notice elements in the Claims Procedure Orders are reasonable in the circumstances, addressing an oversight from previous submissions.
The court granted Meeting Orders and Claims Procedure Orders to advance a $32.5 billion global settlement of tobacco claims under the CCAA.
The Superior Court of Justice addressed multiple motions within the complex Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceedings of JTI-Macdonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, Imperial Tobacco Company Limited, and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. The court granted a stay extension until January 31, 2025, and approved Meeting Orders and Claims Procedure Orders.
These orders facilitate the advancement of comprehensive Plans of Arrangement, developed by the court-appointed Mediator and Monitors, aiming for a Pan-Canadian global settlement of tobacco claims totaling $32.5 billion.
The court found the plans were not "doomed to fail" despite outstanding issues regarding financial allocation among the Tobacco Companies and the creditor status of JTI-Macdonald TM Corp.
Corporate attribution doctrine applies to one-person corporations on a purposive basis.
The appellant investors, who participated in a Ponzi scheme operated by a one-person corporation, sought to have the trustee in bankruptcy's unjust enrichment claims statute-barred under Ontario's Limitations Act, 2002 by attributing the directing mind's knowledge of illegal interest and commission payments to the corporation.
The majority held that the corporate attribution doctrine applies to one-person corporations on the same purposive, contextual, and pragmatic basis as to other corporations, and that courts retain discretion to decline attribution when it would undermine the purposes of the laws engaged — here, the limitations and bankruptcy regimes.
In concurrence, a separate judge held that resort to the common law corporate attribution doctrine was unnecessary because the codified agency rules in s. 12 of the Limitations Act, 2002 provided a complete answer, and that the claims were not discoverable until the trustee was authorized by the court to bring them.
All judges agreed that the investors were disentitled from equitable set-off for lack of clean hands, that the referral agreements were illegal contracts at common law, and that one appellant was not dealing at arm's length with the corporation.
The court approved property proceeds distribution and vehicle retrieval but adjourned a factoring sale motion.
In a CCAA proceeding, the Applicants sought three orders: approval of a factoring portfolio purchase agreement, approval for distribution of proceeds from a property sale, and permission for a creditor to sell certain vehicles.
The court approved the distribution of Chehalis property proceeds to Roynat.
For the Regions vehicles, the court granted the order allowing Regions to take possession, setting a 30-day retrieval period and approving storage costs of $35/day.
The motion for approval of the JD Factors Purchase Agreement was adjourned to a later date, as Mitsubishi HC Capital Canada Inc. objected, claiming ownership of the receivables and requiring more time to prepare its position.
The court approved a property sale, solicitation process, and governance protocol in a CCAA restructuring.
In a Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceeding, the applicants sought court approval for the sale of a real property, the Monitor's reports, a revised governance protocol, and a sale and investor solicitation process (SISP) for their logistics business.
The court approved the property sale, finding it met the Soundair Principles despite not being a court-supervised process.
The Monitor's reports and activities were also approved.
The proposed SISP was approved with a minor amendment requiring the Monitor to consult directly affected secured creditors.
The Revised Governance Protocol, which included default commission rates for vehicle sales and collections, was approved as an interim measure, balancing the need for cost recovery with creditor concerns, noting that financiers could negotiate alternative rates or withhold consent to sales.
The court approved a stay extension, a $30 million debtor-in-possession facility, and various restructuring protocols under the CCAA.
The applicants, Pride Group Holdings Inc. et al., sought an amended and restated initial order under the CCAA, including an extension of the stay period, approval of a debtor-in-possession (DIP) facility, elevation of charge priorities, confirmation against set-off, and approval of governance, real estate monetization, and intercompany/unsecured claims preservation protocols.
The court granted the requested stay extension to June 30, 2024, approved the $30 million DIP facility, and approved all proposed protocols.
The court declined to add an exception to the paramountcy provision as requested by certain securitization funders and approved a carve-out for Triumph Business Capital but limited it to CDN $3 million.
The court lifted a receivership stay allowing a hospital to terminate a defaulted construction contract and dismissed the lenders' attempts to enforce interim payments.
The case involved three interrelated motions within the receivership of ProjectCo, the entity responsible for the St. Michael’s Hospital redevelopment.
Unity Health Toronto sought to lift a stay of proceedings to terminate the Project Agreement due to ProjectCo's defaults.
The Bank of Montreal, as Administrative Agent for the Lenders, sought an order to assign ProjectCo's rights to enforce a Tower Interim Completion (TIC) payment and to dismiss Unity's motion.
Unity also sought to dismiss the Lenders' TIC application for lack of standing.
The court granted Unity's motion to lift the stay and to dismiss the Lenders' TIC application, and dismissed the Lenders' assignment motion.
The court found Unity would be materially prejudiced by the stay's continuation, while the Lenders' prejudice was contractually prescribed.
The Lenders lacked standing for the TIC application, and no legal or equitable assignment of ProjectCo's rights to enforce the TIC payment existed.
The court granted an initial CCAA order and DIP financing for an insolvent cannabis company.
The Applicants, a group of affiliated cannabis companies, sought and were granted an initial order under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) due to insolvency and an urgent liquidity crisis.
The court declared them eligible for CCAA protection, appointed FTI Consulting Canada Inc. as Monitor, approved a debtor-in-possession (DIP) credit facility of up to $2.4 million for initial working capital, granted a 10-day stay of proceedings, extended the stay to non-applicant affiliated entities and their directors/officers, approved administration and directors' charges, and provided relief from certain securities reporting obligations.
The court found Ontario to be the chief place of business, establishing jurisdiction.
An order approving a sale process to implement a prior judgment is interlocutory and appealable only to the Divisional Court with leave.
The Court of Appeal heard motions to quash an appeal from a trial judge's order approving a sale process for a family business.
The court found the approval order to be interlocutory, serving as a mechanism to implement remedies from the trial judgment, and thus not determining substantive issues.
The correct appeal route for such an order is to the Divisional Court with leave.
Consequently, the motions to quash the appeal were allowed, and the appellants were granted an extension to seek leave to appeal to the Divisional Court.
The court granted an unopposed motion to extend the CCAA stay period and authorize interim distributions from construction project trust funds.
The Monitor brought a motion for an extension of the stay period under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) and authorization to make distributions from the Bremner Project Settlement Proceeds Reserve and the Niagara Project Settlement Proceeds Reserve.
The proposed distributions were to prioritize post-filing amounts, then proven priority claims (including lien claims under the Construction Lien Act), followed by repayment of certain outstanding amounts, and finally, any remaining balance for general unsecured creditors.
The motion was unopposed.
The court found the proposed distributions appropriate and the extension of the stay period reasonable, satisfying the good faith and due diligence requirements of the CCAA.
The court appointed a receiver to oversee a trust winding-up due to management conflicts.
The plaintiffs sought the appointment of a receiver over the DMCC Group of companies to oversee the winding-up and termination of a Trust and the distribution of its assets.
The motion was brought after the Trust Administrator issued a wind-up notice.
The court applied the "just and convenient" test under s. 101 of the Courts of Justice Act, finding that the individual defendants' conflicts of interest and lack of meaningful progress in the wind-up process warranted an independent receiver.
The receivership was granted but limited to specific key entities (the Administrator, General Partner, and DMCC Americas (Canada)), with the possibility of expansion.
The court declined to appoint a receiver under the oppression remedy at this stage.
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed with no costs awarded due to missing costs outline.
The moving parties sought leave to appeal an order of Conway J. The Divisional Court dismissed the motion for leave to appeal.
No costs were awarded as the responding parties failed to file a costs outline.