WWW.LEXPERT.CA
|
2019
|
LEXPERT 29
Pincus, Stephen N. Goodmans LLP
(416) 597-4104 spincus@goodmans.ca
Mr. Pincus is widely recognized as one of Canada's leading M&A and capital
markets lawyers. He has played a leadership role on many landmark
transactions, and has pioneered the development of Canadian REITs,
SPACs, income funds, and domestic and cross-border IPOs.
Pillon, Elizabeth Stikeman Elliott LLP
(416) 869-5623 lpillon@stikeman.com
Ms. Pillon is a partner in the Litigation & Dispute Resolution Group
and Head of the Restructuring & Insolvency Group in Toronto. Her practice
focuses on commercial litigation. Her restructuring and insolvency practice
involves Ontario-based restructurings, Companies' Creditors Arrangement
Act, Receivership and Bankruptcy proceedings and cross-border
insolvency proceedings.
Perry, QC, F. Brent Felesky Flynn LLP
(403) 260-3306 bperry@felesky.com
Mr. Perry is a Governor (former Chair) of the CTF whose practice covers a
broad spectrum of business and personal tax planning, with a particular
focus on financings, M&A, divestitures, corporate and trust structuring and
international tax planning, as well as representing clients in disputes with
CRA. He has authored papers and lectured for many organizations.
Perry, Chrysten E. Stikeman Elliott LLP
(403) 266-9010 cperry@stikeman.com
Ms. Perry is Managing Partner of the Calgary office, Co-Head of the Energy
– Oil & Gas Group and a member of the Partnership Board. She has over 30
years' experience practising corporate and commercial law related to oil
& gas projects, spanning a number of industry sectors including
conventional petroleum and natural gas, LNG, NGLs, heavy oil, shale
and coal-bed methane.
Pasquariello, Joe Goodmans LLP
(416) 597-4216 jpasquariello@goodmans.ca
Mr. Pasquariello focuses on corporate restructuring, bankruptcy and
insolvency litigation. He represents key parties in high profile and complex
domestic, cross-border and international matters, including Nortel and
Carillion. He is recognized as a leading insolvency/restructuring lawyer by
various guides, chairs industry seminars and is a member of the Insolvency
Institute of Canada, and INSOL.
LEXPERT-RANKED LAWYERS
"e Canadian system is more flexible and
practical," says Alex MacFarlane, a partner in
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP's Toronto office
and national co-chair of BLG's Insolvency &
Restructuring Group. "It leaves more discretion
with the sitting judge and allows others to come
up with solutions."
However, he says, "the systems work pretty
smoothly together."
Wagner agrees that "the CCAA is a lean and
flexible statute with fewer codified rules," which
allows courts to adapt to unique circumstances.
"We aren't tied to a lengthy code, like the US
Bankruptcy Code, and multiple first-day papers
and motions that significantly increase the cost of
the proceedings," she says. "Under our CCAA, we
have one initial order that covers all first-day re-
lief " in proceedings. "And that's based on a model
order that was developed with the assistance of
our judges and the insolvency Bar for efficiency.
"Relief aer the first day is driven by principles
as opposed to rigid rules," Wagner adds. ere is
more flexibility under the inherent jurisdiction
of the CCAA courts for third-party releases, and
which are sometimes key to resolution of a case.
"We don't have unsecured creditors' committees
that are statutorily mandated and very active in
the United States that can lead to increased costs
and lengthier proceedings," she says. What the
CCAA provides for is a court-appointed monitor
to look out for the interests of stakeholders in a
fair and efficient manner.
Challenges can arise when a Canadian com-
pany is a debtor in processes under Chapter 11 of
the US Bankruptcy Code and in Canada under
the CCAA, she says. "It's more cumbersome and
you're trying to meet both sets of rules, which are
not the same." If there is a conflict between the
two regimes, the Canadian company that files in
both jurisdictions may be disadvantaged by the
more rigid US regime.
For this reason, Wagner says her firm typically
advocates for concurrent proceedings whereby
a corporation with legal entities in both Canada
and the US has its Canadian companies file pro-
ceedings in Canada and its US companies in
the United States. She gives the example of Golf
Town, owned and operated by Golfsmith Inter-
national Holdings Inc. of Austin, Texas. While
very few locations were closed in Canada, almost
all locations in the US were closed down, she says.
e US and Canadian companies were in a shared
credit facility and the US operations were in dire
straits. e proceedings ran separately, in two ju-
risdictions and under two regimes. is meant
that US trade creditors didn't get Canadian as-
sets; rather, the Canadian assets got to those cred-
itors, and the Canadian operations continued.
e restructuring of Target Canada also used
Pukier, Brian M. Stikeman Elliott LLP
(416) 869-5567 bpukier@stikeman.com
Mr. Pukier is a partner in the Mergers & Acquisitions Group. His practice is
focused primarily on cross-border M&A, private equity investments, corporate
finance transactions, complex corporate reorganizations and public policy.
He has extensive experience in counselling senior management and the
boards of directors of leading public and private corporations.
