On a CCAA motion, the moving parties sought approval of a reverse vesting transaction and ancillary relief following a court-approved SISP with a stalking horse credit bid.
The court applied the s. 36(3) criteria and found the process was transparent, adequately marketed, monitor-supervised, and fair and reasonable in the circumstances.
The court accepted the monitor’s evidence that a going-concern outcome would produce materially better stakeholder outcomes than liquidation and would preserve enterprise value while reducing restructuring costs.
Applying the Harte Gold framework, the court held the reverse vesting structure was necessary, economically superior to viable alternatives, non-prejudicial to stakeholders relative to alternatives, and reflective of fair value for preserved intangibles.
The motion was granted and both the Reverse Vesting Order and Ancillary Order were approved.
