Author: Jassmine Girgis Page 8 of 9

B.A. (Calgary); JD (With Distinction) (Western); LL.M. (Cambridge). Associate Professor. Member of the Alberta Bar. Please click here for more information.

Case considered: Sun Indalex Finance, LLC et al v United Steelworkers et al, 2013 SCC 6.

Introduction

On February 1, 2013, Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC” or “Court”) released its much awaited decision, Sun Indalex Finance, LLC et al. v United Steelworkers et al. The case involved a company, Indalex, that was pursuing restructuri ng proceedings under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, RSC 1985, c C-36 (“CCAA”). Prior to its restructuring, Indalex had been failing to meet its employer contribution obligations to the company’s pension plan and when the pension plan was wound up, there was a deficiency in the funds.

Damages for Mental Distress in Breach of Contract

By Jassmine Girgis

On September 24, 2010

In Contracts

PDF version: Damages for Mental Distress in Breach of Contract

Case considered: J.O. v. Strathcona-Tweedsmuir School, 2010 ABQB 559

In J.O. v. Strathcona-Tweedsmuir School, the court awarded the plaintiff damages for mental distress arising from breach of contract. The facts of this case can be found in Alice Woolley’s recent ABlawg post.

The contract in question was one between the student, J.O., and the school. Ultimately, the court grounded its decision on the breach of contract in administrative fairness, finding that, based on the Private Schools Regulation (Alta. Reg. 190/2000) and on case law, the duty of fairness was an implied term of the contract. Having determined that the procedure followed by the school “fell considerably short of meeting [the school’s] duty of fairness” (para. 34), the school was in breach of its contract. The court awarded the plaintiff damages in the amount of one school year’s tuition for breach of the contract of instruction, and in an interesting move, also granted her contractual damages for mental distress, arising from her expulsion.

Restructuring under the CCAA: Should A Debtor Always Be Allowed to Proceed?

By Jassmine Girgis

On January 28, 2010

In Bankruptcy and Insolvency, Creditors’ Remedies

Case considered: Budget Waste Inc., Re, 2009 ABQB 752.

PDF version: Restructuring under the CCAA: Should A Debtor Always Be Allowed to Proceed?

LoVecchio J.’s decision in Budget Waste Inc., Re (“Budget Waste“) is a great example of the questions courts need to keep in mind as they are deciding on issues that arise in the context of restructuring proceedings under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-36 (“CCAA“).

The GM Saga So Far

By Jassmine Girgis

On June 5, 2009

In Bankruptcy and Insolvency, Corporate / Commercial

PDF version: The GM Saga So Far

The current financial crisis is arguably the largest corporate debacle and multi-market crash since the Great Depression. Its costs for corporations are substantial and many high profile companies have filed for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 11 (U.S. Code, Title 11, Chapter 11) or the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S., 1985, c. C-36) (“CCAA“). In the United States and elsewhere, this has even affected financial institutions, institutions previously viewed as “too big to fail”, namely AIG, Citigroup, Bear Stearns, IndyMac Bank, F.S.B. (the second largest bank failure in U.S. history), Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), Lehman Brothers, and Wells Fargo. To date, many Canadian corporations have filed for CCAA protection.

Limited Partnerships: Devon Canada Corporation v. PE-Pittsfield, LLC

By Jassmine Girgis

On January 8, 2009

In Corporate / Commercial

Cases Considered: Devon Canada Corporation v. PE-Pittsfield, LLC, 2008 ABCA 393.

PDF Version: Limited Partnerships: Devon Canada Corporation v. PE-Pittsfield, LLC

In Devon Canada Corporation v. PE-Pittsfield, LLC, the Alberta Court of Appeal clarified the law respecting foreign limited partnerships and discovery of limited partners in two respects. First, it determined that limited partners cannot be examined when the limited partnership is named as a defendant in an action. Second, it determined that a foreign, unregistered limited partnership has the same rights and obligations of a limited partnership under Alberta law.

Author: Jassmine Girgis Page 8 of 9

Indalex: Priority of Provincial Deemed Trusts in a CCAA Restructuring

Damages for Mental Distress in Breach of Contract

Restructuring under the CCAA: Should A Debtor Always Be Allowed to Proceed?

The GM Saga So Far

Limited Partnerships: Devon Canada Corporation v. PE-Pittsfield, LLC