Categories
Brandon Blog Post

RECEIVERS AND RECEIVERSHIPS: CAN A FINANCIALLY TROUBLED CANADIAN LAW FIRM BE PLACED IN AN EMBARRASSING RECEIVERSHIP?

Receivers and receiverships: Introduction

Imagine a prestigious Canadian law firm, typically the epitome of stability and justice, suddenly hit by a financial storm. The once robust balance sheets now shake, and partners are left to navigate a legal and financial labyrinth they never expected. This Brandon’s Blog takes you on a journey through the intersection of law and finance, revealing the truth behind what happens when even the legal giants fall on hard times.

Financial turbulence is a universal challenge affecting any business, including law firms. In the context of Canadian law firms, the concept of receivers and receiverships is unique, and the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta grappled with this issue in a recent case. Join us as we explore the legal strategies, regulations, and complexities of a financially challenged Canadian law firm placed in receivership.

Definition of receivers and receiverships

What Is Receivership?

Receivers and receiverships are a legal process that includes the retention of a 3rd party, referred to as a receiver, to take control of a company’s assets, finances and operations in an effort to resolve the underlying economic problems. Receivership is a lawful remedy used when a company, sole proprietorship, partnership or person, even including a law office, encounters impossible monetary issues. Receivers and receiverships can be used either to restructure a business by separating the good assets from the horrific financial problems or for a straight liquidation.

Receivership is a legal system where a secured creditor either independently designates or petitions the court to appoint a 3rd party, described as a receiver, to manage the properties and affairs of a business or person. Receivers and receiverships become a multifaceted process imbued with complexity. This option regularly serves as an avenue for the reconfiguration of a faltering business or the resolution of financial disagreements among diverse parties.

Navigating receivership involves a formidable blend of legal acumen and also the capability to make wise financial judgments. It is incumbent upon companies and people alike to realize the far-reaching ramifications of receivers and receiverships as well as the prospective scenarios that might ensue from its invocation. Among these considerations lies the essential issue of its repercussions on stakeholders, including employees, unsecured creditors, as well as lenders.

Within Canadian territory, the mantle of a receiver can solely be born by an appropriately qualified licensed insolvency trustee to manage this intricate legal process.

When Is Receivership Considered?

Receivership ends up being a factor to consider when a business experiences severe financial distress, such as mounting financial debts, operational inadequacies, or the inability to satisfy financial commitments. It works as a last resource to salvage what continues to be of the firm’s assets.

an image of a financiallt\y troubled company that is havnig to go into either receivership or bankruptcy
receivers and receiverships

Canada’s legal landscape is complicated, with federal and provincial laws and guidelines controlling the process of receivership. Let us explore this further.

Federal Laws

In Canada, the procedure of receivership is regulated mostly by federal government regulation, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. The receiver must act lawfully. In a court appointment, the receiver must act in the very best interests of all parties involved. In this type of appointment, receivers as well as receiverships go through oversight by the court. The procedure of receivership can be complicated as well as calls for well-informed legal and financial recommendations to guarantee an effective outcome.

Provincial Regulations

Provinces in Canada also have their own laws which intersect with receivers and receiverships. Examples of provincial regulations that could affect receivers and receiverships are:

  • the actual statute under which a court supervises receivers and receiverships;
  • food and beverage service;
  • landlord and tenant.issues;
  • real property laws;
  • employment laws; and
  • environmental regulations.

Receivers and receiverships: Signs of financial troubles in Canadian law firms

Early signs of law firm financial distress may manifest discreetly initially; however, they possess the potential to swiftly burgeon into more significant predicaments if they remain unaddressed. These initial cues often comprise a diminution in earnings or profits, the gradual accumulation of aged or unrecoverable accounts receivable, protracted deferrals in settling obligations with suppliers, elevated turnover ratios among the workforce, and a conspicuous dearth of financial commitment to technological advancements or educational initiatives.

Furthermore, additional red flags might encompass extravagant expenditures on non-essential items, an absence of transparency in financial disclosures, and an excessive reliance upon a select few pivotal clientele for the lion’s share of the generated income. It is of paramount importance for legal practitioners to diligently oversee their fiscal well-being and to adopt assertive measures for rectification as soon as such issues come to the fore. These remedial actions may encompass the implementation of cost-saving measures, the pursuit of novel revenue streams, and judicious investments in pivotal facets of their enterprise to maintain a competitive edge within the industry.

an image of a financiallt\y troubled company that is havnig to go into either receivership or bankruptcy
receivers and receiverships

Receivers and receiverships: Initiating receivership proceedings

Secured creditors and their loans

In the intricate tapestry of the Canadian receivership process, secured creditors assume a pivotal role, being the foremost lenders vested with a security interest in the debtor company assets. This security interest, the secured loan being a legal tether of paramount significance, empowers them to wield their influence with precision, invoking either the private appointment of a receiver or the judicial machinery to issue an order for a court-appointed receiver.

In the realm of receivers and receiverships, this designated receiver takes upon themselves the onerous task of seizing the reins and stewarding the debtor company’s possessions.

Empowered by their position, secured creditors hold sway over the inception of the receivership process, their voices resonating in the selection of the receiver, a decision of paramount consequence. This influence is not merely titular; it is wielded to safeguard their interests and optimize the potential for recovery.

There are two types of receivers and receiverships:

Privately-appointed receiver

In privately appointed receiverships, the receiver bears the weighty mantle of responsibility, owing a fiduciary duty to the secured lender, a commitment to act in their utmost interest. Secured creditors, in turn, possess the authority to interpose their veto, casting judgment upon select decisions proposed by the receiver.

Court-appointed receiverships

However, when the path leads to court-appointed receivership, a different dynamic emerges, for here, the receiver is an independent arbiter, an officer of the court, rendering decisions with impartiality. No doubt secured creditors will attempt to wield their influence, but the court-appointed receiver must be seen to be even-handed.

In the grand scheme of the Canadian receivership process, secured creditors emerge as the linchpin upon which rests the beginning of efficient oversight and resolution of a debtor’s financial quagmire.

an image of a financiallt\y troubled company that is havnig to go into either receivership or bankruptcy
receivers and receiverships

Receivers and receiverships case study: A recent instance of a Canadian law firm receivership process

The recent decision of the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta is in the case of Law Society of Alberta v Higgerty, 2023 ABKB 499. This case involves an application to put a law firm into receivership. Notwithstanding that it is not one of the larger firms, it is, in my view, having been involved in both the receiverships and bankruptcies of law firms, a complete analysis of all the important considerations that insolvency practitioners and non-insolvency lawyers must be aware of in either advising or dealing with an insolvent law firm.

Law firm receivers and receiverships: Background

The Law Society of Alberta (“LSA”) and Mr. Richard E. Harrison are the applicants on this matter (collectively, the “Applicants”). The Applicants seek an order appointing a receiver or a receiver and manager over certain undertakings, personal property, real property and assets of the law practices of Patrick B. Higgerty and Patrick B. Higgerty Professional Corporation (collectively, “Higgerty Law”).

The receivership order sought by the Applicants is unique because of the circumstances underlying this application (the “Application”). The tension in this Application concerns: (i) the desire of a secured lender to enforce its rights and entitlements under the security it holds over the assets held by Higgerty Law; and (ii) the desire of the LSA to ensure the parties are acting in the public interest and to protect solicitor-client privilege that is a component of the files of Higgerty Law.

Easy Legal Finance Inc (“ELFCo”) is a secured lender to Higgerty Law. It seeks the right to enforce its security which is part of the loan agreement. It proposes a process that it alleges will ensure confidentiality and solicitor-client privilege are maintained for stakeholders, and not strip ELFCo of substantially all of its contractual, legal and beneficial rights.

Law firm receivers and receiverships: Facts

During its years of operation, Higgerty Law focused on personal injury law and class action litigation. Compensation for those files was often based on contingency fee agreements, payable when the matter concluded. On March 10, 2023, Higgerty Law was placed under custodianship pursuant to an Order of this Court (the “Custodianship Order”). Mr. Harrison was named the custodian (the “Custodian”).

On the date the Custodianship Order was issued, Higgerty Law had a substantial number of creditors. ELFCo asserted it held security over all present and after-acquired personal property of Higgerty Law. ELFCo claims that its security gives it priority over the proceeds of the class action lawsuits.

Higgerty Law has a debt of around $1.4 million to ELFCo. The interest rate charged on the ELFCo Loan is a whopping 18% per year! Last April, ELFCo served a demand for payment and a notice to enforce security under section 244(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (“BIA”).

The President of ELFCo swore in an affidavit that he believed there was no reasonable prospect of Higgerty Law repaying the ELFCo Loan.

Law firm receivers and receiverships: What the Court needed to address

Initially, several issues were to be addressed in the Application, including: (i) whether a receiver and manager should be appointed; (ii) whether the interest payable on the ELFCo Loan should be stayed; and (iii) the scope of the ELFCo Loan security. The parties agreed to restrict the hearing to the issue of whether a receiver and manager should be appointed. The other issues were deferred to a subsequent hearing.

ELFCo challenges the proposal to appoint a receiver and manager. It asserts there is no business of Higgerty Law to manage and no material estate to administer. ELFCo also asserted that a receiver and manager in these circumstances would be limited to the negotiation of the transfer of a limited number of legal files to new lawyers. It submits that this is not an appropriate mandate for a receiver and manager and that it would not be commercially reasonable in view of the needless cost and redundancy a receivership would create.

As an alternative, ELFCo made an application for approval of a basic process to enforce its security. It asserts that this alternative process would ensure that confidentiality and solicitor-client privilege are maintained for stakeholders. Further, ELFCo asserted that this alternative process would not strip it of substantially all its rights and entitlements under its security, which would occur under the Custodian’s proposal. The one thing that the ELFCo proposal failed to recognize is that under section 244(4) of the BIA, only a licensed insolvency trustee can act as a receiver.

The unique circumstances of this case presented a challenge for the Court because there are various stakeholders with different rights that must be balanced, including:

  • the rights of the Higgerty Law clients to have their solicitor-client privileged communications protected;
  • the entitlement of a secured creditor to enforce its legal and beneficial rights;
  • the rights of Higgerty Law clients whose funds appear to have been misappropriated;
  • the rights of Higgerty Law clients to access their file material; and
  • the rights of unsecured creditors, including clients of Higgerty Law.

A wide array of factors should be taken into consideration when considering receivers and receiverships

The Court considered a list of important factors in considering a receivership appointment:

  1. whether irreparable harm might be caused if no order were made, although it is not essential for a creditor to establish irreparable harm if a receiver is not appointed, particularly where the appointment of a receiver is authorized by the security documentation;
  2. the risk to the security holder, taking into consideration the size of the debtor’s equity in the assets and the need for protection or safeguarding of the assets while litigation takes place;
  3. the nature of the property;
  4. the apprehended or actual waste of the debtor’s assets;
  5. the preservation and protection of the property pending judicial resolution;
  6. the balance of convenience to the parties;
  7. the fact that the creditor has the right to appoint a receiver under the documentation provided for the loan;
  8. the enforcement of rights under a security instrument where the security-holder encounters or expects to encounter difficulty with the debtor and others;
  9. the principle that the appointment of a receiver is extraordinary relief, which should be granted cautiously and sparingly;
  10. the consideration of whether a court appointment is necessary to enable the receiver to carry out its duties more efficiently;
  11. the effect of the order upon the parties;
  12. the conduct of the parties;
  13. the length of time that a receiver may be in place;
  14. the cost to the parties;
  15. the likelihood of maximizing return to the parties;
  16. the goal of facilitating the duties of the receiver.

Ultimately, the Court has to decide if, under provincial law, on the balance of the evidence, is it just and convenient to appoint a receiver.

Receivers and receiverships: The evidence and the Court’s analysis

The evidence, in this case, is that:

  • there are trust account improprieties in the range of $419,000; and
  • there is no reasonable prospect of the Applicants or Higgerty Law repaying the ELFCo Loan or continuing to make loan payments.

By virtue of being members of the LSA, custodians can maintain solicitor-client privilege over files and information within their custody. Both the LSA and the Custodian are stakeholders in ensuring the maintenance of solicitor-client privileged information.

There is an important distinction between secured creditors, who are interested in protecting themselves and usually do so through a receiver that they appoint, and a custodian who is typically interested in protecting the clients of the financially troubled law firm and their respective rights and entitlements, including their respective rights to solicitor-client privilege.

From the perspective of the secured creditors, the results which flow from the appointment of a custodian are no happier. A custodian is obliged by the to protect the interests of clients of the firm, including confidentiality, and is consequently unable to collect accounts receivable either efficiently or economically. The task of the custodian is significantly dissimilar from that of the receiver in that the primary objective of the custodian is the protection of clients’ interests. Receivers, by contrast, act in accordance with the interests of creditors. Any benefit enjoyed by creditors which results from the appointment of the custodian is merely incidental to the primary function of the custodian, which is the protection of the clients.

Solicitor-client privilege is a fundamental underpinning of the legal profession in Canada. It is near absolute and merits protection.

Solicitor-client privilege cannot be breached by the interests and entitlement of a secured creditor. Any risks in that regard must be carefully considered. To illustrate this point, the Supreme Court of Canada has held that Anton Piller orders must ensure the protection of the solicitor-client communications of the party being searched. There is no right to disclosure of such communications in discovery because they are protected by privilege.

The Judge determined that the higher duty in the circumstances of this case is to protect the public interest, which includes the protection of privilege associated with the files of Higgerty Law. Given the inherent concerns associated with the issues touching on the “Property” as that term is defined in the Draft Receiver Order, it is inevitable that matters concerning the solicitor-client privilege over the Higgerty Law files will be engaged. As a regulator, the LSA has an obligation to ensure the parties are acting in the public interest and to protect privilege over the Higgerty Law files.

The Judge’s view was that protecting solicitor-client privilege is an essential element of this custodianship. The unique circumstances of this case presented a challenge for the Court because there are various stakeholders with different rights that must be balanced, including:

  1. the rights of the Higgerty Law clients to have their solicitor-client privileged communications protected;
  2. the entitlement of a secured creditor to enforce its legal and beneficial rights;
  3. the rights of Higgerty Law clients whose funds appear to have been misappropriated;
  4. the rights of Higgerty Law clients to access their file material; and
  5. the rights of unsecured creditors, including clients of Higgerty Law.

Receivers and receiverships: The Court’s decision

Based on the Judge’s review of the evidence and analysis of the law, the Judge found that it was just or convenient to appoint a receiver and manager of Higgerty Law. The unique circumstance, in this case, calls for a receiver and manager to be appointed in order to best ensure the protection of the solicitor-client privilege associated with the files of Higgerty Law.

The Judge also directed that the Draft Receiver Order obligate the receiver and manager to come back to the Court for an order whenever a Higgerty Law file is proposed to be transferred to a third party. The Draft Receiver Order must stipulate the notice that is to be given to the stakeholders whenever there is a proposed file transfer.

an image of a financiallt\y troubled company that is havnig to go into either receivership or bankruptcy
receivers and receiverships

Receivers and receiverships: Impact of receivership on law firm clients

Client confidences

Maintaining client confidence is a paramount concern during receivership. The receiver must uphold ethical standards and protect sensitive information.

Receivership does not absolve a law firm from its ongoing legal obligations, including representing existing clients and fulfilling contractual commitments.

Advantages

Receivership can offer advantages such as a structured approach to resolving financial issues and protecting creditor interests.

Disadvantages

However, it also comes with disadvantages, including the potential loss of control for the firm’s owners and uncertainty for employees.

an image of a financiallt\y troubled company that is havnig to go into either receivership or bankruptcy
receivers and receiverships

Alternatives to receivership for law firms: Restructuring options available to a law firm

Restructuring

When confronted with financial difficulties, a Canadian law practice has a range of alternatives to think about prior to being put in receivership. Bankruptcy, restructuring either by merging with another firm or financial help in the form of additional partner capital contributions could be potential options that must be explored. Restructuring permits firms to rearrange their operations and debt structure to bring back financial security.

Bankruptcy

Receivership or bankruptcy, on the other hand, ought to be taken into consideration when the company’s financial situation is irreparable. It is necessary for an insolvent law practice to carefully evaluate and take into consideration these choices in order to determine the very best strategy to resolve their financial difficulties.

Receivers and receiverships: Frequently asked questions

1. What triggers the need for receivership in a law firm?

Receivership may be triggered in a law firm when the organization is no longer able to meet its financial obligations. This can be due to several factors, including a significant decrease in client demand, mismanagement of funds, or overwhelming debt. The need for receivership can also arise from legal action, such as a lawsuit against the firm.

When the organization is unable to pay its debts, receivership becomes necessary to protect the interests of clients, creditors and stakeholders. In such cases, a court-appointed receiver takes control of the firm’s assets and operations to manage the liquidation process and ensure the equitable distribution of funds from the sale of assets.

2. Can a law firm continue to operate during receivership?

Being in receivership can be a roller coaster ride for a law practice! The future of the firm lies in the hands of the receiver and their assessment of the scenario. If the receiver believes that the law office has the prospective to create revenue by continuing business operations, then the firm might be allowed to continue operating in some fashion in continuing legal services and moving the clients’ legal proceedings forward, while a realization strategy is being developed. But, if the receiver thinks that the firm cannot operate profitably and therefore it’s better for the firm’s assets should be sold, the receiver will seek court approval for that strategy.

3. How does receivership impact the firm’s clients?

The influence of receivership on a law firm’s clients can be significant. Clients may experience hold-ups in obtaining legal services, provided the sanctity of solicitor-client privilege. Furthermore, clients may be worried about the stability and dependability of the firm during the receivership process, which can impact their self-confidence in the firm’s capability to continue to supply essential legal solutions. It is important for both the receiver as well as the law firm in receivership to interact transparently with the clients during the receivership to maintain their confidence as well as minimize the impact of the process.

4. What alternatives exist to receivership for struggling law firms?

When confronted with financial difficulties, a Canadian law practice has a range of alternatives to think about prior to being put in receivership. Bankruptcy, restructuring either by merging with another firm or financial help in the form of additional partner capital contributions could be potential options that must be explored. Restructuring permits firms to rearrange their operations and debt structure to bring back financial security.

5. Are there differences in receivership laws across Canadian provinces?

As indicated above, receivership is governed first by the BIA, a federal statute. Although there may be differences in provincial law in the areas described above that have an effect on receivership proceedings, the base laws governing receivers and receiverships are the same across all provinces.

Receivers and Receiverships: Conclusion

In conclusion, receivers and receiverships are a complex but vital legal process that can be initiated when a Canadian law firm faces insurmountable financial challenges. It involves the appointment of a receiver to manage the firm’s assets and affairs, with the ultimate goal of protecting stakeholder interests. While receivership is a significant step, it is essential to understand its pros and cons and explore alternative solutions before proceeding.

Individuals and business owners must take proactive measures to address financial difficulties and promptly seek assistance when necessary. It is crucial to recognize that financial stress is a prevalent concern and seeking help is a demonstration of fortitude, rather than vulnerability. Should you encounter challenges in managing your finances and find yourself burdened by stress, do not delay in pursuing aid.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing people, entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses with debt problems that are in financial distress. Are you now worried about just how you or your business are going to survive? Are you worried about what your fiduciary obligations are and not sure if the decisions you are about to make are the correct ones to avoid personal liability? Those concerns are obviously on your mind.

The Ira Smith Team understands these financial health concerns. More significantly, we know the requirements of the business owner or the individual who has way too much financial debt. You are trying to manage these difficult financial problems and you are understandably anxious.

It is not your fault you can’t fix this problem on your own and it does not mean that you are a bad person. The pandemic has thrown everyone a curveball. We have not been trained to deal with this. You have only been taught the old ways. The old ways do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. Team uses innovative and cutting-edge methodologies, to adeptly navigate you through the intricacies of your financial challenges, ensuring a resolution to your debt-related predicaments without resorting to the rigours of the bankruptcy process. We can get you debt relief now!

We have helped many entrepreneurs and their insolvent companies who thought that consulting with a Trustee and receiver meant their company would go bankrupt. On the contrary. We helped turn their companies around through financial restructuring.

We look at your whole circumstance and design a strategy that is as distinct as you are. We take the load off of your shoulders as part of the debt settlement strategy we will draft just for you.

The Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team understands that people facing money problems require a lifeline. That is why we can establish a restructuring procedure for you and end the discomfort you feel.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation. We will listen to the unique issues facing you and provide you with practical and actionable ideas you can implement right away to end the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

an image of a financiallt\y troubled company that is havnig to go into either receivership or bankruptcy
receivers and receiverships

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

WHAT IS RECEIVERSHIP – CAN YOU UNDO A PROVEN RECEIVERSHIP ORDER?

what is receivership
what is receivership

If you would prefer to listen to an audio version of this what is receivership Brandon’s Blog, please scroll down to the bottom of this page and click on the podcast.

What is receivership: Introduction

Last spring I wrote about a Court of Appeal For Ontario decision. That decision confirmed that the time allowed to appeal a receivership Court order is 10 days under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA).

This Brandon’s Blog on what is receivership discusses a decision of the Court of Appeal of Manitoba which further sets out a framework for anyone wishing to appeal an order made in this court-appointed receivership legal process. Prior to discussing this Manitoba case, I ought to go over some receiver 101 facts.

What is receivership?

What is receivership? A receivership is a solution for secured lenders, such as a chartered bank. The bank loans the company money and the company agrees in the loan agreement to pledge the business assets as security for the loan. If the business defaults on its lending arrangement, generally by non-payment, the secured lender can enforce its security against the assets in receivership.

This is the lender using its enforcement rights to recover its secured debt. Other than for a government trust claim, the secured creditor’s debt ranks on a priority basis above all other creditor claims. Enforcement action is definitely a form of legal action. So receivership is a remedy for secured creditors.

There are 2 types of receivers in Canada; 1) a privately appointed receiver or; 2) a court-appointed receivership. A receiver gets its authority and powers from either the security documents in a private appointment or the Court Order in a court appointment. Once appointed, regardless of the type of appointment, the receiver has the power to take possession of all the assets of the company, including sending notices to all customers to advise that the receiver is now collecting the accounts receivable.

The BIA specifies that only a licensed insolvency trustee (previously called a bankruptcy trustee or also can be called a licensed insolvency practitioner) (LIT) can serve as a receiver. A receiver in a private appointment acts on behalf of the appointing secured creditor. A court-appointed receivership creates a responsibility to all creditors upon the court’s receiver, not just the applicant in the court process. This would include any unsecured creditor also. The BIA also requires the receiver to do file notice of its appointment with the Official Receiver at the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy and to send the required statutory notice to all known creditors.

What is a company receivership?

Normally, the procedure starts with the secured creditor, who lent money to a company under a security agreement, talking to the insolvency trustee. The security document tends to secure all company assets, including accounts receivable.

When it is decided that there ought to be a receiver designated, the secured lender needs to decide if it will be a private appointment, or if the assistance of the Court is required. Each situation will dictate what is the best method for receivership. They can either appoint the receiver under an appointment letter (private appointed) or apply to the Court for an Order selecting the receiver (court-appointed receivership). So when considering what is receivership, you must look at all the circumstances and decide what kind of appointment is needed.

what is receivership
what is receivership

As a former employee, what am I entitled to? The Wage Earner Protection Program

Upon a company going into receivership (or bankruptcy), the LIT is obliged to inform workers of the Wage Earner Protection Program (WEPP) as well as offer former employees information about amounts owing to them. From the day of bankruptcy or receivership, trustees and also receivers have 45 days to send out Trustee Information Forms showing the amounts owing to workers. WEPP is administered by Service Canada.

Employees have 56 days to send their Service Canada WEPP application to the WEPP. The Service Canada handling time for a WEPP payment is within 35 days of receipt of a completed WEPP Canada application and Trustee Information Form.

The WEPP gives funds to Canadian former staff members owed money when their employer becomes either bankrupt or goes into receivership. The amount of employee earnings covered is an amount equivalent to 7 times maximum regular insurable earnings under the Employment Insurance Act.

As of January 1, 2020, the max yearly insurable earnings amount is $54,200. This means that the max amount a previous worker can assert under WEPP is $7,296.17 in 2020. A certain portion is a trust claim and the balance is an ordinary claim. Normally, the receiver makes at least the trust claim payment to the former employees. Service Canada will pay the balance.

So in what is receivership, if the receiver does not pay the trust claim, Service Canada will and bill it back to the receiver. This all takes time and will increase the cost of administration. That is why the receiver normally pays the trust portion directly.

What is receivership: Receivers and receiverships

In a private receivership, the receiver needs to get the approval of the party that made the secured loan and appointed the receiver prior to implementing its recommended action steps. In a court-appointed receivership, the receiver needs the authorization of the court for its activities and actions.

The receiver’s very first responsibility is to take possession and control of the assets, properties and undertaking of the company in receivership. In a private appointment, the receiver takes possession of the assets covered by the secured creditor’s security agreement. In a court-appointed receivership, the receiver takes possession of whatever assets it has authority over from the Court Order.

The receiver has to make a decision whether it can obtain a better value for the business asses if it runs the business. Conversely, the receiver might determine that the danger of running the business negates any potential upside in value. In that case, the receiver would not operate the business and merely liquidate the assets.

The receiver after that establishes a strategy for the sale of assets. The receiver also has to make sure that the assets are physically secured and insured. The what is receivership process is fairly complex and all-encompassing.

The receiver, whether in a private appointment or a court appointment, has wide powers to perform its duties.

What is receivership: Challenging a receivership appointment Court Order

On September 19, 2019, the Court of Appeal of Manitoba released its decision in 7451190 Manitoba Ltd v CWB Maxium Financial Inc et al, 2019 MBCA 95. On December 20, 2018, the Court made an Order appointing a receiver (Receivership Order) over the assets of 7451190 Manitoba Ltd. (Company). The Order was made upon the application to Court by the lender who made the secured loan.

On January 14, 2019, the Company launched an appeal to the Receivership Order. The secured lender opposed the appeal on 2 main grounds, being:

  • the company did not have an appeal as of right, rather, it requires to seek leave to appeal first (which should be declined); and
  • the appeal was statute-barred as it was not submitted within 10 days of the Appointment Order appealed from.

The issues the Appeal Court needed to consider were::

  • whether the nature of the Company’s appeal of the Appointment Order in what is receivership requires an application for leave or if it is a right under Section 193 of the BIA;
  • if the leave to appeal is necessary, should such leave be provided;
  • whether the Company should be given more time to submit its notice of appeal.

    what is receivership
    what is receivership

What is receivership: Appealing a business receivership Court Order

So the first issue the Court had to consider in what is receivership was whether or not the Company had an appeal of the receivership Order as a right, or if it needed to first apply to the Court with leave to appeal motion. The Court determined that the Company’s appeal of the receivership Appointment Order is not of right. Rather, leave to appeal needed to be made.

The things that the Appeal Court considered in making its determination included that:

  • The security documents entered into by the Company clearly outlined the lender’s remedy to appoint a receiver when there was an event of default.
  • The company was represented and made submissions against the appointment of a receiver at the initial hearing where the Appointment Order was made.
  • The Appointment Order contained the necessary “comeback clause”. No party made an application under this clause to amend the powers of the receiver under the Appointment Order.
  • Since appointed, the receiver has actually filed two reports with the Court. The reports notified all stakeholders and the Court of the decisions taken and choices made. The receiver also sought approval of different activities. The Company has actually not filed any type of motion challenging the actions taken by the receiver.

Should leave to appeal the appointment of the receiver-manager be granted?

Section 193 of the BIA allows that an appeal lies to the Court of Appeal from any kind of order of a judge of the court in certain situations. The Court confirmed that the criteria to think about in making a decision whether to give leave to appeal under section 193(e) of the BIA are:

  • The suggested appeal raises an issue of general importance to the practice of bankruptcy/insolvency matters or to the administration of justice as a whole.
  • The issue raised is of relevance to the action itself.
  • The proposed appeal is prima facie meritorious.
  • Whether the suggested appeal will unduly hinder the progression of the bankruptcy/insolvency case.

The Court went on to say that, regardless of these criteria, the Court retains a residual discretion to grant leave to appeal in what is receivership where the refusal to do so would result in oppression.

When the Court considered these requirements, taking into consideration the whole context, the Court was not persuaded to grant the Company leave to appeal the receivership order.

The Court determined that in this case, the Company’s appeal should be denied. This Court of Appeal of Manitoba is consistent with the Court of Appeal for Ontario case that I mentioned at the top of this Brandon’s Blog and previously wrote about. It also provided additional detail and reasons as to why appealing a receivership order is not a right, but leave to appeal needs to be granted.

What is receivership: Summary

I hope you enjoyed this what is receivership Brandon’s Blog. Is your company in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex corporate restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the business owner entrepreneur. You are worried because your company is facing significant financial challenges. Your business provides an income not only for your family. Many other families rely on you and your company for their well-being.

The stress placed upon you due to your company’s financial challenges is enormous. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your company’s problems; financial and emotional. The way we dealt with this problem and devised a corporate restructuring plan, we know that we can help you and your company too.

We know that companies facing financial problems need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a company restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain it is facing. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you are serious about finding a solution, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team today.

Call us now for a free consultation. We will get your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

what is receivership

Call a Trustee Now!