Volume 27, No. 1 - October/Octobre 2011
   Volume 28, No. 2 - April 2012
   Volume 28, No. 1 - February 2012
   Volume 26, No. 1 - October/Octobre 2010
   Volume 26, No. 4 - May/Mai 2011
   Volume 26, No. 3 - March/Mars 2011
   Volume 26, No. 2 - December/Décembre 2010
   Volume 25, No.3 - May/Mai 2010
   Volume 25, No.2 - January/Janvier 2010
   Volume 25, No.1 - October/Octobre 2009
   Volume 24 No. 3 - June/Juin 2009
   Volume 24, No. 3 - April/Avril 2009
   Volume 24, No. 2 - February/Février 2009
   Volume 27, No. 1 - October/Octobre 2011


MAIN
   PUBLIC AFFAIRS
   MEMBERSHIP
   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
   SECTIONS
   LAW STUDENTS
   CONFERENCE CENTRE
   ABOUT US

 
 

 

Volume 27, No. 1
October/Octobre 2011
Insolvency Law Section
Section du droit de l'insolvabilité

Upcoming
Program(s)
Program Materials Section
Executive
 

Notes From The Chair
Frank Spizzirri
 
Fall is a special time of year for the insolvency bar. Practitioners are back in the saddle and ready to tackle matters that were put on the slow burner to allow for summer vacations. Lenders are back and looking at what to do with troubled loans for their upcoming quarter and year ends. The courts return to their full complement of judges waiting to be dazzled by counsel. And the markets enter their usual period of corrections and wild gyrations. This fall is no different. The sovereign debt crisis, quantitative easing, the market corrections, and recent high profile judicial decision are all having an impact on how lenders and borrowers behave, how they are planning to weather these events, and practitioners consider how to advise each.
learn more >>

Follow-up to Re Charlestown Residential School, 2010
Wojtek Jaskiewicz
 
On July 21, 2010 Deputy Registrar Mills’ decision in Re Charlestown Residential School, 2010 CarswellOnt 5343 (“Re Charlestown”) was released. Deputy Registrar Mills held that an appeal from a trustee’s disallowance of a proof of claim was a true appeal. The appeal would only proceed as a hearing de novo if an injustice would result if restricted to the record
learn more >>

Preferences under s. 95 and the Rights of Secured Creditors - Tucker v. Aero Inventory (UK) Ltd., [2011]
Frank Spizzirri and Shaheen Karolia
 
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice addressed the issue of whether a trustee can pursue a preference action solely on behalf of, and for the benefit of a secured creditor, or alternatively, whether the proceeds of a preference action under s. 95 of the BIA is subject to the rights of secured creditors.
learn more >>

Case Comment: Schreyer v. Schreyer
Robert A. Klotz
 
The Supreme Court of Canada’s recent decision (July 14 2011) in Schreyer v. Schreyer arose out of facts that are not uncommon in Manitoba, where the case originated, or indeed in Ontario. It involved an equalization claim against an exempt asset where the asset holder had declared bankruptcy after separation. While the asset in this case was a homestead, exempt from execution under the Manitoba Judgments Act, the SCC's reasoning is squarely applicable to matrimonial property claims in the other equalization jurisdictions, namely Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Northwest Territories and Nunavut, both as to pensions and RRSP's.
learn more >>

OBA Insolvency Law Section Crossword – Edition #1
Frank Spizzirri and Shaheen Karolia
 
Welcome to our first edition of the OBA Insolvency Law Section Crossword. The first person to complete and email a correctly filled crossword will receive a prize. Bonus prize goes to the first person to find the hidden error. Enjoy!
learn more >>

About this Newsletter
 
Editors:
Kate Stigler
Gustavo F. Camelino
Robin A. Dodokin
Joseph J. Bellissimo

 

OBA Editor:
newsletters@oba.org

Insolvency News 
is published by the Insolvency Law Section of the Ontario Bar Association. Members are encouraged to submit articles. The articles that appear in this publication represent the opinions of the authors. They do not represent or embody any official position of, or statement by, the OBA except where this may be specifically indicated; nor do they attempt to set forth definitive practice standards or to provide legal advice. Precedents and other material contained herein are intended to be used thoughtfully, as nothing in the work relieves readers of their responsibility to consider it in the light of their own professional skill and judgment.