32 total
Plan of Arrangement approved; court refused to carve out objector's speculative securities claim from general release.
The applicants sought a Final Order approving a Plan of Arrangement under the Canada Business Corporations Act to restructure approximately $1 billion in defaulted debt.
A dissenting debentureholder objected, seeking a carve-out from the arrangement's general release to preserve a potential civil claim for failure to disclose a material change regarding the restructuring negotiations.
The court dismissed the objection, finding the arrangement fair and reasonable, negotiated in good faith, and overwhelmingly approved by securityholders.
The Final Order was granted.
The court granted a preliminary interim order and stay of proceedings under the CBCA to allow Corus Entertainment to finalize a complex recapitalization transaction.
Corus Entertainment Inc. and 17311737 Canada Inc. sought and obtained a preliminary interim order in connection with a proposed arrangement under the Canada Business Corporations Act.
The court granted a stay of rights and remedies against the Corus Entities until December 18, 2025, to provide breathing space for the applicants to finalize definitive documentation for a recapitalization transaction.
The transaction is designed to significantly reduce the company's debt and annual cash interest costs while extending maturity dates.
The applicants demonstrated compliance with statutory requirements and good faith in pursuing the arrangement following a formal strategic review.
The stay does not affect obligations to trade creditors, suppliers, customers, or employees.
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.
Court approved CCAA plan amendments and dismissed a social stakeholder's objection for lack of standing.
This endorsement addresses motions by the court-appointed Monitors in the ongoing Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceedings involving JTI-Macdonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited and Imperial Tobacco Company Limited, and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. The Monitors sought approval for amendments to the CCAA Plans to resolve the allocation of a $750 million working capital holdback among the Tobacco Companies.
The only opposition came from the Heart and Stroke Foundation, which objected as a social stakeholder but was found to lack standing.
The court granted the motions, finding the amendments did not adversely affect any creditors and were appropriate in the circumstances.
The court granted an unopposed motion to approve a notice protocol order for class action plaintiffs.
This endorsement concerns ongoing insolvency proceedings under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) involving JTI-Macdonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, Imperial Tobacco Company Limited, and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. The specific motion, brought by the applicants, sought a Quebec Class Action Plaintiffs Notice Protocol Order.
The motion was unopposed and was granted by the court, with the requested order signed.
The court granted an unopposed motion for a Sanction Protocol Order in ongoing CCAA proceedings.
This endorsement concerns a joint motion brought by the court-appointed Monitors for JTI-Macdonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, Imperial Tobacco Company Limited, and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. in their ongoing Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceedings.
The Monitors sought a Sanction Protocol Order to establish the date for the Sanction Hearing, ratify the litigation timetable, approve the dissemination of the Agenda and Sanction Hearing procedure, approve the Omnibus Sanction Hearing Notice, and set the deadline for Sanction Hearing Objection Notices.
The motion was unopposed and was granted by the court, with three orders signed.
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.
The court dismissed a motion to appoint an interim receiver over a co-shareholder's shares in a real estate development dispute.
The plaintiffs brought a motion seeking the appointment of an interim receiver over the shares of one of the defendants in several companies involved in land development projects.
The parties, who are shareholders in these companies, had a significant falling out, leading to defaults on secured loans.
The plaintiffs argued that a receiver was necessary to refinance debt and maximize value.
The court determined that the appropriate test for the interlocutory receiver appointment was the RJR MacDonald test, with an elevated 'strong prima facie case' standard due to the Mareva-like nature of the relief.
The court found that the plaintiffs failed to meet the merits requirement, as they asserted no legal or beneficial interest in the defendant's shares and the memorandum of understanding did not obligate the defendant to contribute further funds.
Furthermore, the court found no irreparable harm and that the balance of convenience did not favor the appointment, concluding that a receivership was not an appropriate remedy for a shareholder dispute where the moving party sought to eliminate the other party's control over their own shares.
The court granted unopposed motions extending the CCAA stay period and authorizing ancillary operational relief for the applicant tobacco companies.
This endorsement concerns three tobacco companies (JTI-MacDonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, Imperial Tobacco Company Limited, and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc.) operating under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA).
Each applicant sought an extension of their stay period until September 30, 2024, to continue formulating plans of arrangement.
Imperial also requested authorization to terminate a retirement plan and post security for a vaping product license.
RBH sought a procedural amendment for employee grievances.
The court, finding no opposition and satisfied with the applicants' good faith, diligence, and sufficient resources, granted all requested relief, noting significant progress in ongoing mediation.
The court approved DIP financing but refused to appoint the debtor's former auditor as monitor.
In a Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceeding, the applicants sought an Amended and Restated Initial Order (ARIO) to extend a stay of proceedings, approve debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing, and increase court-ordered priority charges.
A central issue was whether Ernst & Young Inc. (E&Y) should continue as Monitor, given that an affiliate had acted as the applicants' auditor within the two-year restricted period under CCAA s. 11.7(2).
The court granted the stay extension, approved the DIP financing, and increased the charges, finding these necessary for the restructuring.
However, the court denied E&Y's continuation as Monitor, emphasizing a stricter interpretation of CCAA s. 11.7(2).
The court found no "extenuating or unique circumstances" to override the general rule against appointing a former auditor within the restricted period, despite arguments of cost-effectiveness and existing knowledge.
FTI Consulting Canada Inc. was appointed as the new Monitor.
The court granted an unopposed stay extension in complex CCAA proceedings and directed the Monitors and Mediator to collaboratively develop plans of arrangement.
This endorsement concerns the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceedings for JTI-MacDonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, Imperial Tobacco Company Limited, and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. The court granted an unopposed motion to extend the stay period until March 29, 2024.
Recognizing the complexity and the four-and-a-half-year duration of negotiations, the court directed the three court-appointed Monitors, in conjunction with the court-appointed Mediator, to collaborate and develop comprehensive Plans of Compromise or Arrangement.
The objective is to finalize plans that are fair and reasonable to all applicants and creditors, moving from observable activity to meaningful action.
Fairness of differential consideration in CCAA plan deferred to Sanction Hearing due to low threshold for Meetings Order.
In a CCAA proceeding, the court considered supplementary written submissions regarding the appropriateness of differential consideration offered to unsecured creditors in the proposed Plan.
The court accepted the applicants' submission that the fairness of the differential consideration, which involves providing shares to Term Loan Lenders and cash to General Unsecured Creditors, should be determined at the Sanction Hearing rather than at the Meetings Order stage, given the low threshold for a Meetings Order and the presence of conflicting expert reports.
Litigation claimants in CCAA proceeding restricted to one vote per action but entitled to claim valuation.
The Applicants sought an Authorization Order and Meetings Order under the CCAA.
The primary issues in dispute concerned the voting rights and classification of Litigation Claimants, which included uncertified U.S. class actions, a certified Ontario class action, and Texas mass tort claims.
The court held that the Litigation Claimants are creditors entitled to vote, but restricted them to one vote per action to prevent them from overriding other stakeholders on numerosity grounds.
The court also ordered summary proceedings to value their claims rather than accepting the Applicants' proposal to value them at $1.
Finally, the court declined to place the Term Loan Lenders in a separate class from other unsecured creditors, finding sufficient commonality of legal interests.
The court dismissed Ontario's motion to lift the CCAA stay on its $330 billion health care cost recovery action against tobacco companies.
Her Majesty the Queen in right of Ontario sought to lift a stay on its $330 billion health care cost recovery action against three tobacco companies (JTI-Macdonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco, Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc.) and eleven co-defendants, which was imposed under CCAA proceedings.
Ontario proposed to temporarily stay the effects of any judgment.
The court dismissed the motion, emphasizing the need to preserve the status quo in CCAA proceedings to facilitate a global resolution of significant claims.
Allowing Ontario's action to proceed would alter the level playing field, distract from restructuring efforts, and impose significant costs, prejudicing other stakeholders.
The court affirmed its broad jurisdiction under the CCAA to impose a blanket stay on all proceedings.
The applicants, JTI-Macdonald Corp., Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited, Imperial Tobacco Company Limited, and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc., sought protection under the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) following a $13.5 billion judgment from the Quebec Court of Appeal and other ongoing litigation.
JTI-Macdonald Corp. and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. moved for orders to file Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) leave applications but suspend further proceedings.
Imperial Tobacco Canada Limited and Imperial Tobacco Company Limited sought a blanket stay of all proceedings and limitation periods.
The Quebec class action plaintiffs opposed the motions and sought to partially lift the stay.
The court affirmed its broad jurisdiction under CCAA s. 11 to stay all actions, including appellate proceedings and limitation periods.
The court dismissed the motion by JTI-Macdonald Corp. and Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc., and granted Imperial Tobacco's motion, finding that a blanket stay best preserved the status quo and facilitated a global resolution for all stakeholders.
The court granted an Initial Order under the CCAA to a tobacco company facing a $13.5 billion judgment.
JTI-Macdonald Corp. (JTIM) sought an Initial Order under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) following a $13.5 billion judgment from the Quebec Court of Appeal and other significant health care costs recovery actions.
The court granted the Initial Order, including a stay of proceedings against JTIM and other defendants, appointment of Deloitte Restructuring Inc. as Monitor, approval of administrative, directors', and tax charges, authorization to pay pre-filing and post-filing obligations, appointment of Blue Tree Advisors Inc. as Chief Restructuring Officer, and authorization to appeal the Quebec Judgment to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The court found JTIM to be an insolvent company to which the CCAA applies, and that a stay of proceedings was appropriate to facilitate a collective solution for all stakeholders.
The court approved a proportional class action distribution plan and class counsel fees.
The court approved the class action distribution plan, which allocated proceeds proportionally based on prior wind-down payments, and the class counsel's retainer agreement, fees, and disbursements.
The court also approved honourariums for the representative plaintiff and another instrumental class member.
A dispute regarding priority between General Motors' security interest and Class Counsel's first charge was noted for a subsequent decision.
The court approved a CCAA claims process to identify and determine intellectual property claims.
The applicant, U.S. Steel Canada Inc. (USSC), brought a motion seeking approval of a claims process for the identification and determination of intellectual property claims asserted by United States Steel Corporation (USS) against USSC within ongoing CCAA proceedings.
USSC argued the process was necessary to provide clarity for potential purchasers in its Sales and Investment Process (SISP) and facilitate a going concern bid.
USS opposed, arguing the process was impractical and burdensome.
The court granted the motion, subject to certain excisions from the claim form, finding the process beneficial for the restructuring and for maximizing recoveries for stakeholders, and that it had the authority under section 11 of the CCAA to do so.
Intercompany loans from parent to subsidiary in CCAA proceedings confirmed as debt, not equity claims.
In the CCAA proceedings of U.S. Steel Canada Inc., its parent company, United States Steel Corporation, sought approval of several proofs of claim totaling over $2 billion.
Various stakeholders objected, arguing that the intercompany loans should be re-characterized as 'equity claims' under the CCAA and that the security granted for certain advances was void as a fraudulent preference or unenforceable for lack of consideration.
The court rejected the objections, finding that the parent company had a reasonable expectation of repayment when the advances were made, and that the security was validly granted for fresh consideration and did not constitute a fraudulent preference.
The claims were confirmed as debt claims.