Court File and Parties
Court File No.: 33-1943714 Date: 2022-02-22
Superior Court of Justice - Ontario
Re: Re Douglas Cameron Carriere
Before: Associate Justice Kaufman
Counsel: Allan MacLeod, Licensed Insolvency Trustee Yannick Michelin, Counsel for the Superintendent of Bankruptcy
Endorsement
1The Superintendent of Bankruptcy (“Superintendent”) intervenes in the taxation of the Licensed Insolvency Trustee’s (“Trustee”) fees. She asks the Court to reduce the Trustee’s fees on the ground that he failed to fulfill his statutory duties in a timely manner.
2The administration of the bankrupt’s estate proceeded as follows: on December 17, 2014, Douglas Cameron Carriere filed an assignment in bankruptcy. Mr. Carriere did not have surplus income. The Trustee subsequently determined the bankrupt was a beneficiary under his father’s will. The Trustee collected the inheritance proceeds in the amount of $19,900.
3The Trustee requested that the administration be converted from a summary to an ordinary administration because the bankrupt’s inheritance increased the bankrupt’s realizable assets to over $15,000. An Amended Certificate of Appointment was issued on February 3, 2017.
4The bankrupt was discharged on September 18, 2015. The Trustee’s general ledger and time summary indicates that there was no substantive activity on this estate after September 18, 2015.
5On September 20, 2021, the Trustee issued its final Statement of Receipts and Disbursements (“SRD”), in the amount of $10,368.79, resulting in a dividend of $11,114.13. The creditors did not oppose the taxation of the Trustee’s accounts.
Superintendent’s position
6On October 15, 2021, the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (“Superintendent”) issued a letter of comment and requested that the Trustee proceed to taxation. The Superintendent contends that the Trustee did not perform his duties in a timely manner, contrary to Rule 36 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency General Rules. The Superintendent does not allege that the Trustee failed to carry out his functions with the requisite competence, honesty, integrity or due care. Rather, she submits that the Trustee should be disentitled to his full fees for failing to administer this estate in a timely manner.
Trustee’s position
7The Trustee submits that this estate was administered in accordance with the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, that it resulted in significant dividends, and that the creditors have not objected to his fees and disbursements. He disputes the Superintendent’s conclusion that there has been inordinate delay in closing the estate.
8The Trustee submits that on June 15, 2021, the Superintendent advised LITs in a town hall that they should focus on closing estates that were 10 years of age or older. The Trustee explains that the delay in closing this estate is in part explained by the fact that he was focused on closing these older estates. The Trustee also says that on March 19, 2021, he concluded an agreement with the Superintendent by which he undertook to close four ordinary estates per month starting in May 2019. The Trustee argues that he has honoured this agreement, that the Superintendent was aware of the delays associated with this estate at the time of the agreement, and that the Superintendent is estopped from relying on these delays as a ground to reduce the Trustee’s fees.
Analysis
9Rule 36 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency General Rules provides that LITs must perform their duties in a timely manner and carry out their functions with competence, honesty, integrity and due care. The Superintendent is entitled to intervene on the taxing of a Trustee's SRD to dispute the remuneration sought by the Trustee. To maintain the general credibility of the bankruptcy system, a Registrar may approve a lower amount than the creditors have approved.
10The Superintendent provided authority for the proposition that a failure to perform statutory duties in a timely manner was a relevant consideration in the taxation of a Trustee’s fees.
11In Bankruptcy of John Edward Los, the British Columbia Supreme Court’s upheld a Registrar’s decision to reduce the Trustee’s fees where, as here, there was a six-year delay in the administration of the estate. The Registrar concluded that a reduction in the Trustee’s remuneration was warranted to offset interest lost to the creditors and to reflect the Court’s disapproval of the inordinate delay. The Registrar reduced the Trustee’s fee by $2,553.50, which represented almost 30% of the Trustee’s fees.
12In Bankruptcy of Gilbert Nelson and others, this Court upheld the Registrar’s decision to reduce the Trustee’s fees by $200 per estate where the Trustee filed s. 170 reports late. The delays ranged between 6 months and three years and 5 months. Lax J. agreed with the Registrar that a Trustee’s failure to fulfill statutory duties on a timely basis was a proper consideration by the court on taxation. The Court held that a Trustee’s failure to fulfill his or her statutory duties impairs the integrity and objectives of the insolvency system as a whole. The Court approved the Registrar’s reduction of the Trustee’s fees as a method of encouraging the efficient and conscientious administration of bankruptcies.
13Finally, in Re Harms, the Trustee submitted his SRD two years late. The Registrar found that the Trustee could not offer a satisfactory explanation for the delay and reduced his fees from $13,334 to $9,000.
Disposition
14I am not persuaded that the Superintendent’s request that LITs focus on closing estates that are 10 years and older, or the closing agreement it reached with the Trustee, explain the six-year delay in submitting the SRD. These are examples of the Superintendent’s efforts to encourage Trustees to carry out their duties in a timely manner. The Superintendent did not create the situation at hand, where an SRD is submitted six years after the administration of the estate was completed. Rather, it appears that the situation is the result of less than perfect office practices.
15In Bankruptcy of Gilbert Nelson and others, Lax J. held that a Trustee who does not perform his statutory duties is at risk of having a Registrar reduce fees on taxation, and that this result will occur in most cases. The reduction in fees is not intended to be a fine or penalty and should be proportionate to the gravity and nature of the dilatory conduct.
16The bankrupt’s creditors were delayed in receiving their dividends for six additional years, which is a substantial amount of time. I agree with the Superintendent that a reduction in fees will strengthen the objectives of the insolvency system by incentivizing the timely and efficient administration of estates.
17In the circumstances of this case, I reduce the Trustee’s fees by $750 and fix the Trustee’s fees and disbursements in the amount of $9,888.79.
Alexandre Kaufman Associate Justice Kaufman
DATE: February 22, 2022