Bankruptcy and Insolvency

Case Commented On: GCMR Contracting Inc v MNP Ltd, 2026 FC 468 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Does the Federal Court have Jurisdiction to Review a Decision of an Insolvency Trustee?

In GCMR Contracting Inc v MNP Ltd, 2026 FC 468 (CanLII), the Federal Court considered whether it has jurisdiction to hear an appeal of a decision by an insolvency trustee to approve or disallow a creditor’s claims. In a short decision, the judge determined that the Federal Court did not have such jurisdiction.

The Automatic Right of Appeal under Section 193(c) of the BIA: The Case for a Narrow Approach in Asset Sale Decisions

By Jassmine Girgis

On December 3, 2025

In Bankruptcy and Insolvency

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case Commented On: Cameron Stephens Mortgage Capital Ltd v Conacher Kingston Holdings Inc, 2025 ONCA 732 (CanLII)

PDF Version: The Automatic Right of Appeal under Section 193(c) of the BIA: The Case for a Narrow Approach in Asset Sale Decisions

Section 193 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 (BIA) sets out four circumstances in which a party has an automatic right of appeal to a provincial appellate court from any order or decision of a judge. Where none of these enumerated grounds are engaged, a party can seek leave to appeal under section 193(e).

This post is about appeals dealing with the disposition of the debtor’s assets by trustees or receivers.

Disgorgement Orders as Non-Dischargeable Debt

By Jassmine Girgis

On November 20, 2025

In Bankruptcy and Insolvency

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case Commented On: Williams (Re), 2025 BCSC 1128 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Disgorgement Orders as Non-Dischargeable Debt

Re Williams, 2025 BCSC 1128, deals with a debtor who, prior to his bankruptcy, was found by the British Columbia Securities Commission (the Commission) to have masterminded a Ponzi scheme. The Commission imposed a penalty on Mr. Williams and ordered him to disgorge a sum of $6.8 million, an obligation from which he later sought release upon applying for a bankruptcy discharge. The issue in this case was whether the Commission’s debt fell into one of the categories of non-dischargeable debts, namely those arising from obtaining property or service by fraudulent misrepresentation or false pretences (s 178(1)(e) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 (BIA)).

Ponzi Scheme Payouts as BIA Preference Payments

By Jassmine Girgis

On November 7, 2025

In Bankruptcy and Insolvency

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case Commented On: My Mortgage Auction Corp (Re), 2025 BCSC 1520

PDF Version: Ponzi Scheme Payouts as BIA Preference Payments

When an insolvent debtor pays one creditor over others, it undermines the goal of ensuring a fair and equitable distribution to the bankrupt’s creditors, which is one of the goals of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 (BIA), and it disrupts the statutory scheme of distribution set out in the BIA (see my previous posts on BIA preferences here and here).

BIA Preferences: Rebutting the Presumption of Intention to Prefer

By Jassmine Girgis

On September 23, 2025

In Bankruptcy and Insolvency

By: Jassmine Girgis

Case Commented On: RPG Receivables Purchase Group Inc v American Pacific Corporation, 2025 ONCA 371

PDF Version: BIA Preferences: Rebutting the Presumption of Intention to Prefer

One of the goals of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 (BIA) is to ensure a fair and equitable distribution of the bankrupt’s assets to its creditors. To that end, the BIA preference provisions allow a trustee to claw back payments made by the debtor to a creditor if the payments result in a preference to one creditor over others. The debtor can make any payments it wants while solvent, but these payments become improper if they are made when the debtor is insolvent.