馃攳
WHAT IS RECEIVERSHIP - CAN YOU UNDO A RECEIVERSHIP ORDER? - YouTube
Channel: Ira Smith
[0]
what is receivership can you undo a
[2]
receivership order introduction last
[5]
spring I wrote about a Court of Appeal
[7]
for Ontario decision that decision
[9]
confirmed that the time allowed to
[11]
appeal a receivership court order is ten
[13]
days under the bankruptcy and insolvency
[15]
Act Canada BIA
[17]
this Brandon's blog on what his
[19]
receivership discusses a decision of the
[21]
Court of Appeal of Manitoba which
[22]
further sets out a framework for anyone
[25]
wishing to appeal a receivership Court
[27]
order prior to discussing this Manitoba
[29]
case I ought to go over some receiver
[31]
101 facts
[32]
what is receivership a receivership is a
[36]
solution for secured lenders such as a
[38]
chartered bank the bank loans the
[40]
company money and the company pledges
[42]
the business assets as security for the
[44]
loan if the business defaults on its
[46]
lending arrangement
[47]
generally by non-payment the secured
[49]
lender can enforce its security against
[51]
the assets in receivership so
[53]
receivership is a remedy for secured
[55]
creditors there are two kinds of
[57]
receiverships in Canada one a private
[59]
appointment or to a court appointment a
[62]
receiver gets its authority and powers
[64]
from either the security documents in a
[66]
private appointment or the court order
[68]
in a court appointment the BIA specifies
[70]
that only a licensed insolvency trustee
[72]
previously called a bankruptcy trustee
[74]
Li T can serve as a receiver a receiver
[78]
in a private appointment acts on behalf
[80]
of the appointing secured lender a
[81]
court-appointed receiver has the
[83]
responsibility to all creditors what is
[86]
a company receivership normally the
[89]
procedure starts with the secured
[90]
financial institution talking to a lick
[92]
when it is decided that there ought to
[94]
be a receiver designated the secured
[96]
lender needs to decide if it will be a
[98]
private appointment or if the assistance
[100]
of the court is required each situation
[102]
will dictate what is the best method for
[104]
receivership they can either appoint the
[106]
receiver under an appointment letter
[108]
applied to the court for an order
[109]
selecting the receiver court-appointed
[111]
receivers and receiverships in a private
[114]
receivership the receiver needs to get
[116]
the approval of the secured lender prior
[118]
to implementing its recommended action
[120]
steps in a court appointment the
[122]
receiver needs the authorization of the
[124]
court for its activities and actions the
[126]
receivers very first responsibility is
[128]
to take possession and control of the
[130]
assets properties and undertaking of the
[132]
company and receive
[134]
in a private appointment the receiver
[136]
takes possession of the assets covered
[138]
by the secured lenders security in a
[140]
court appointment the receiver takes
[142]
possession of whatever assets it has
[144]
authority over from the court order the
[146]
receiver has to make a decision whether
[147]
it can obtain a better value for the
[149]
business asses if it runs the business
[151]
conversely the receiver might determine
[153]
that the danger of running the business
[155]
negates any potential upside and value
[157]
in that case the receiver would not
[159]
operate the business and merely
[160]
liquidate the assets the receiver after
[163]
that establishes a strategy for the sale
[165]
of the assets the receiver also has to
[167]
make sure that the assets are physically
[169]
secured and insured challenging a
[171]
receivership appointment court order on
[174]
September 19 2019 the court of appeal of
[177]
Manitoba released its decision in seven
[179]
million four hundred fifty one thousand
[181]
one hundred ninety Manitoba Limited v CW
[183]
V maxium financial incorporated at al
[186]
2019 NB C a 95 on December 20th 2018 the
[191]
court made an order appointing a
[192]
receiver receivership order over the
[195]
assets of seven million four hundred
[196]
fifty one thousand one hundred ninety
[198]
Manitoba Limited company the order was
[201]
made upon the application to court by
[203]
the secured lender On January 14 2019
[206]
the company appealed the receivership
[208]
order the secured lender opposed the
[210]
appeal on two main grounds being the
[213]
company did not have an appeal as of
[215]
right
[215]
rather it requires to seek leave to
[217]
appeal first which should be declined
[219]
and the appeal was statute barred as it
[223]
was not submitted within ten days of the
[224]
appointment order appealed from the
[227]
issues the appeal court needed to
[228]
consider were : whether the nature of
[232]
the company's appeal of the appointment
[233]
order requires an application for leave
[235]
or if it is a right under Section 193 of
[238]
the BIA if the leave to appeal is
[240]
necessary should such leave be provided
[242]
whether the company should be given more
[245]
time to submit its notice of appeal
[246]
appealing a business receivership court
[248]
order so the first issue the court had
[251]
to consider was whether or not the
[252]
company had an appeal of the
[253]
receivership order as a right or if it
[256]
needed to first apply to the court with
[257]
leave to appeal motion the Court
[259]
determined that the company's appeal of
[261]
the receivership appointment order is
[263]
not of right rather leave to appeal
[265]
needed to be made
[266]
the things that the court considered in
[268]
making its determination included that
[270]
the security documents entered into by
[272]
the company clearly outlined the lenders
[274]
remedy to appoint a receiver when there
[276]
was an event of default the company was
[278]
represented and made submissions against
[280]
the appointment of a receiver at the
[282]
initial hearing where the appointment
[283]
order was made the appointment order
[286]
contained the necessary come back clause
[287]
no party made an application under this
[290]
clause to amend the powers of the
[291]
receiver under the appointment order
[293]
since appointed the receiver has
[296]
actually filed two reports with the
[297]
court the reports notified all
[299]
stakeholders and the court of the
[301]
decisions taken and choices made the
[303]
receiver also sought approval of
[305]
different activities the company has
[307]
actually not filed any type of motion
[309]
challenging the actions taken by the
[310]
receiver
[313]
should leave to appeal the appointment
[315]
of a receiver manager be granted section
[318]
193 of the be allows that an appeal lies
[320]
to the court of appeal from any kind of
[322]
order of a judge of the court in certain
[324]
situations the court confirmed that the
[326]
criteria to think about in making a
[328]
decision whether to give leave to appeal
[329]
under Section 193 e of a B are the
[332]
suggested appeal raises an issue of
[335]
general importance to the practice of
[336]
bankruptcy / insolvency matters or to
[339]
the administration of justice as a whole
[340]
the issue raised is of relevance to the
[343]
action itself the proposed appeal is
[346]
prima facie meritorious whether the
[348]
suggested appeal will unduly hinder the
[350]
progression of the bankruptcy /
[352]
insolvency case the court went on to say
[355]
that regardless of these criteria the
[357]
court retains a residual discretion to
[359]
grant leave to appeal where the refusal
[361]
to do so would result in oppression when
[364]
the court considered these requirements
[365]
taking into consideration the whole
[367]
context the court was not persuaded to
[370]
grant the company leave to appeal the
[371]
receivership order the court determined
[373]
that in this case the company's appeal
[375]
should be denied this Court of Appeal of
[377]
Manitoba is consistent with the Court of
[379]
Appeal for Ontario case that I mentioned
[381]
at the top of this Brandan's blog and
[383]
previously wrote about it also provided
[385]
additional detail and reasons as to why
[387]
appealing a receivership order is not a
[389]
right but leave to appeal needs to be
[391]
granted summary
[394]
your company in need of financial
[395]
restructuring the financial
[397]
restructuring process is complex the IRA
[400]
Smith team understands how to do a
[401]
complex corporate restructuring however
[404]
more importantly we understand the needs
[406]
of the entrepreneur you are worried
[408]
because your company is facing
[410]
significant financial challenges your
[412]
business provides income not only for
[414]
your family many other families rely on
[416]
you and your company for their
[417]
well-being the stress placed upon you
[420]
due to your company's financial
[421]
challenges is enormous we understand
[424]
your pain points we look at your entire
[426]
situation and devise a strategy that is
[428]
as unique as you and your company's
[429]
problems financial and emotional the way
[432]
we dealt with this problem and devised a
[434]
corporate restructuring plan we know
[436]
that we can help you and your company -
[437]
we know that company's facing financial
[440]
problems need a realistic lifeline there
[443]
is no one solution fits all approach
[444]
with the Irish myth team that is why we
[447]
can develop a company restructuring
[448]
process as unique as the financial
[450]
problems and pain it is facing if any of
[453]
this sounds familiar to you and you are
[455]
serious in finding a solution contact
[457]
the IRA Smith trustee and receiver
[459]
incorporated team today call us now for
[461]
a free consultation we will get your
[464]
company back on the road to healthy
[466]
stress-free operations and recover from
[467]
the pain points in your life starting
[470]
over starting now
Most Recent Videos:
You can go back to the homepage right here: Homepage