Introduction
I reviewed a Court decision out of Alberta that was rendered on April 4, 2019. The case is Royal Bank of Canada v. Parkland Properties Ltd., [2019] A.J. No. 412, from the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench. In reviewing this case about an insolvent tenant, who later became a bankrupt commercial tenant, the same would hold true in Ontario. I thought it would be helpful to review the principles in this decision, and how it would relate to an Ontario Commercial Lease Agreement.
Background
Unlike Ontario, there is no commercial tenancy act in Alberta. However, there are various other provincial statutes and a Supreme Court of Canada decision, that provides guidance for commercial landlords and tenants in Alberta.
If a commercial lessee breaches a business lease in Alberta, similar to Ontario law, a landlord has various alternatives. For a properly worded commercial tenancy agreement, the main alternatives include distraining on the tenant’s assets located on the leased commercial premises or terminating the commercial tenant’s lease. Suing for any damages, including rent arrears and for the unexpired duration of the lease, may also be part of the landlord’s rights.
Distraint or distress is the seizure of the commercial tenant’s property in order to acquire the repayment of rent arrears and various other amounts owed. Distraint normally includes the seizure of goods belonging to the lessee on the premises by the landlord to market them for the settlement of the amount owing at that point in time under the lease.
In a properly conducted distraint, no Court order is required. The landlord must also be careful when advising the tenant of the distraint, to also notify the lessee that the lease is not being ended. This way, the landlord may recoup further unpaid amounts or other damages in the future. On a practical basis, if the tenant does not bring the lease into good standing and allows the distraint to be completed, the business is probably over anyway.
Under the Alberta Civil Enforcement Regulation, the landlord would hire a bailiff to carry out the distraint and sale of the assets. This is what happened in the Royal Bank of Canada v. Parkland Properties Ltd. case I recently reviewed.
The facts and decision of the case
The facts are pretty simple. The landlord began and completed distraint proceedings against its tenant. At the time of the seizure, the insolvent tenant was $79,586 behind in rent. The landlord’s bailiff completed the sale of the assets. After taking its fee, the bailiff paid over to the landlord the amount of $223,990. The tenant became a bankrupt company after the funds were paid to the landlord.
Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) was a secured creditor of the tenant. At the date of bankruptcy, RBC was owed $498,799. RBC took an action that originally was an action that could be taken by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee). It did so under section 38 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). The Trustee was either unwilling or unable to launch the action. The action RBC launched was for the repayment of the amount realized by the landlord as a preferential payment under section 95 of the BIA.
The Court ruled partly in favour of RBC. It ordered that the landlord could retain the amount of $79,586. The balance of $144,404 could not be kept by the landlord and had to be paid over to RBC.
Ontario commercial lease agreement: The same decision would be reached in Ontario
I am satisfied that the same decision would be reached in Ontario. As I mentioned above, distraint is not a termination of the lease. Although the practical effect would be to end the tenant’s business, the lease continues and so does the tenant’s obligations to the landlord. The commercial tenant’s rights under its Ontario commercial lease agreement also remain. Distraint is a mutually exclusive remedy from termination of the lease.
The Court determined that Section 95 of the BIA does not apply to set aside distraint proceedings by a landlord under a commercial tenancy agreement in arrears. That section just included payments made by an insolvent party. The Court also stated that Section 70 of the BIA protects the landlord’s distraint because the distraint was fully completed by payment to the landlord.
However, the Court did find that the payment to the landlord was extreme. As you will recall, the distraint is based on the arrears at the time of effecting the distraint. In this case, the amount outstanding at that time was $79,586. However, the amount paid to the landlord, after the costs of distraint, was $223,990. Commercial lease landlord responsibilities include providing proper accounting. Therefore, the Court ordered that the excess over what the landlord was owed, $144,404, had to be paid to the plaintiff, RBC.
If there were no secured creditors and the Trustee launched the application, the result would have been the same. The only difference would be that the excess funds would have to be paid over to the Trustee. The result in Ontario would be the same as in this Alberta case.
Is your company insolvent?
Is your company behind in its rent payments under its Ontario commercial lease agreement? Does it not have enough cash to continue its operations?
If so, call the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of experience assisting people and companies trying to find financial restructuring or a financial debt negotiation strategy. As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee), we are the only professionals licensed, recognized and supervised by the federal government to supply bankruptcy and insolvency advice and carry out strategies to aid you to stay clear of bankruptcy.
Call the Ira Smith Team today so you can cut the stress, anxiousness and pain from your life that your financial issues have caused. With the special roadmap, we establish just for you, we will immediately return you right into a healthy and hassle-free life.
You can have a no-cost analysis so we can help you fix your company’s debt troubles. Call the Ira Smith Team today. This will allow you to go back to a new healthy and balanced life, Starting Over Starting Now.