![]() However, there is no specific test set out in the CCAA to determine when a foreign proceeding should be adjudged a main or a non-main proceeding. This is an important determination, as designation as a foreign main proceeding triggers certain automatic relief under the CCAA, including a stay of proceedings. The court must then determine whether the proceeding is a foreign main proceeding or a foreign non-main proceeding. ![]() ![]() If the court is satisfied as to these two questions, the court is required to recognize the foreign proceeding. On an application seeking recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings, the court must determine if the proceeding is a “foreign proceeding” and if the applicant is a “foreign representative,” as defined by the CCAA. Part IV of the CCAA, a relatively new legal framework (September 2009), is modeled on the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency and provides a regime for dealing with cross-border insolvencies in Canada. On July 6, 2012, in Lightsquared LP (Re), the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the “Ontario Court”), released reasons that clarify the criteria for the identification of the centre of main interest (“COMI”) of an applicant seeking recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings as “Foreign Main Proceedings” pursuant to Section 46 of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”). Municipal, Land Use Planning & Development.International Arbitration & Cross-Border Litigation.White Collar Defence, Fraud & Investigations.Structured Finance, Derivatives & Securitization.Competition, Antitrust & Foreign Investment.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |