3 total
The court appointed an independent evaluator for representative counsel and approved a separate art auction.
The decision addresses motions regarding the appointment of representative counsel for current and former employees and retirees of Hudson’s Bay Company ULC and related entities in ongoing Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceedings.
The Court declined to appoint any of the nominated law firms as representative counsel at this stage, instead appointing the Honourable Herman Wilton-Siegel as an independent third party to evaluate proposals and make a recommendation.
The Court also approved amendments to the Sale and Investment Solicitation Process (SISP) to remove the company’s art and artifact collection from the SISP and to appoint Heffel Gallery Limited to conduct a separate auction for the collection, subject to further court approval of procedures.
The reasons review the legal framework for appointing representative counsel and the importance of balancing stakeholder interests in complex insolvency proceedings.
The court granted an unopposed extension of the CCAA stay of proceedings, increased the Directors' Charge, and approved a financial advisor's engagement.
This endorsement grants a brief adjournment in the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) proceedings involving Hudson’s Bay Company ULC and related entities, following ongoing discussions between the applicants and stakeholders.
The court extends the stay of proceedings, increases the Directors’ Charge, amends the relative priorities of charges, and approves the engagement of Reflect Advisors, LLC as financial advisor.
The court finds the requested relief appropriate, unopposed, and supported by the Monitor, and orders the requested amendments to the Initial Order.
Leave to appeal denied; receiver's duty is to estate's economic interests, not stakeholder's personal criminal defense.
The applicant sought leave to appeal an order directing the receiver to file a Payments Report detailing distributions made by the insolvent companies.
The applicant argued the report could prejudice his ongoing criminal proceedings in the United States.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion for leave to appeal, finding that the receiver's duty is to the economic interests of the estate's stakeholders, not to protect a stakeholder's personal interest in avoiding prejudice in foreign criminal proceedings.
The proposed appeal was found to lack prima facie merit.