Bankruptcy and Insolvency Law - OCJ

A support payor who became an undischarged bankrupt challenged the jurisdiction of the Ontario Court of Justice to conduct a default hearing on child support arrears.

The payor argued that bankruptcy matters fall exclusively within the Superior Court of Justice's jurisdiction and that the stay of proceedings under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act prevented the default hearing from proceeding.

The court held that a default hearing is a family law enforcement procedure, not a bankruptcy matter, and that support claims are not stayed by bankruptcy.

The court dismissed the jurisdictional challenge and confirmed its authority to conduct the default hearing.

The accused was charged with fraudulently disposing of property contrary to section 198(1)(a) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.

The Crown alleged that the accused disposed of a BMW X5 that he had financed but failed to pay for, subsequently claiming it went missing from his driveway.

The trial examined whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused disposed of the vehicle.

The court found that while the accused acted fraudulently, the Crown failed to prove that he disposed of the property as opposed to concealing it, and therefore acquitted him of the charge.

The defendant was charged with three offences under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act: making a material omission in her Statement of Affairs, failing to disclose approximately $40,000 in cash to her trustee, and failing to disclose the same funds in a subsequent Statement of Affairs.

The defendant had declared bankruptcy in September 2007, omitting reference to cash seized by police in January 2007.

She later sought recovery of the seized funds in July 2008, claiming ownership.

The court found the defendant not guilty of the first and third counts but guilty of the second count for failing to inform the trustee of her ownership of the funds between September 2007 and August 2008.