Orestes Pasparakis

The appellant leased truck trailers to a company that subsequently went bankrupt.

A priority dispute arose between the appellant and the bankrupt's secured creditor over the trailers.

The trailers were used in multiple jurisdictions but the debtor was located in Alberta.

The Court of Appeal held that although the lease was a 'true lease' not requiring registration under the Ontario PPSA, the choice of law provisions in s. 7(1) of the Ontario PPSA still applied.

Consequently, Alberta law governed the dispute.

Under the Alberta PPSA, the lease was deemed a security interest requiring registration, and because the appellant registered against the wrong entity, its interest was subordinate to the secured creditor's perfected security interest.

The appeal was dismissed.

The debtor company became insolvent and an interim receiver was appointed.

The receiver terminated all employees but continued operations to sell the business as a going concern.

The union sought to bring successor employer proceedings before the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB).

The bankruptcy judge denied leave under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA).

On appeal, the Court of Appeal held that while s. 47(2) of the BIA does not authorize a bankruptcy court to determine successor employer status, s. 215 gives the court jurisdiction to deny leave to proceed before the OLRB based on bankruptcy considerations.

However, the bankruptcy judge erred by effectively determining the successor employer issue himself.

The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to the bankruptcy court.

The union brought a motion for leave to appeal an order that amended a receivership order to protect the receiver from successor employer status and denied the union leave to proceed against the receiver before the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal, finding that the legal issues regarding the relationship between bankruptcy courts and labour boards, and the status of a receiver as a successor employer, were significant to commercial practice and warranted consideration by the appellate court.