The nature of the
Act within Canada's legal framework governing insolvency was described by the
Supreme Court of Canada in
Century Services Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General): With certain exceptions, the
Act covers a wide range of entities: :* it covers anyone who has resided or carried on business in Canada :* it "includes a partnership, an unincorporated association, a corporation, a cooperative society or a cooperative organization, the successors of a partnership, of an association, of a corporation, of a society or of an organization and the heirs, executors, liquidators of the succession, administrators or other legal representatives of a person;" but :* partners in a partnership may be placed into bankruptcy with that partnership, but that can only occur where the partnership is located in one of the common-law jurisdictions; the
Civil Code of Quebec defines partnership property as being a patrimony independent from its partners :* it does not apply to banks, insurance companies, trust companies or loan companies. :* The
Farm Debt Mediation Act provides that farmers cannot be forced into bankruptcy, but they can make a voluntary assignment. :* The ''
Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act'' provides that a court may order a
stay of proceedings with respect to specified large debtors, whether or not they have already been initiated. The
Act governs bankruptcy proceedings, which are invoked: :* either voluntarily by a person who is insolvent, :* by a debtor's creditors, where the debtor owes at least $1000 and has committed an act of bankruptcy, or :* where a proposal under the Act has failed. The
Act also governs receivership proceedings. Receivers may be appointed by a
secured creditor under the terms of a general security agreement (where the debtor voluntarily agrees), or by the court where a secured creditor: :* is enforcing his security, or :* is acting under a court order made under any other federal or provincial statute that authorizes the appointment of a receiver or receiver-manager. Provision is also made for dealing with cross-border insolvencies and the recognition of foreign proceedings.
Relationship with provincial law Several notable cases known as the "bankruptcy quartet" stand for the following propositions about how the
Act interacts with provincial legislation: • provinces cannot create priorities between creditors or change the scheme of distribution on bankruptcy under s. 136(1) of the
Act; • while provincial legislation may validly affect priorities in a non-bankruptcy situation, once bankruptcy has occurred section 136(1) of the
Act determines the status and priority of the claims specifically dealt with in that section; • if the provinces could create their own priorities or affect priorities under the
Bankruptcy Act this would invite a different scheme of distribution on bankruptcy from province to province, an unacceptable situation; and • the definition of terms such as "secured creditor", if defined under the
Bankruptcy Act, must be interpreted in bankruptcy cases as defined by the federal Parliament, not the provincial legislatures. Provinces cannot affect how such terms are defined for purposes of the
Act. • in determining the relationship between provincial legislation and the
Bankruptcy Act, the form of the provincial interest created must not be allowed to triumph over its substance. The provinces are not entitled to do indirectly what they are prohibited from doing directly. • there need not be any provincial intention to intrude into the exclusive federal sphere of bankruptcy and to conflict with the order of priorities of the
Bankruptcy Act in order to render the provincial law inapplicable. It is sufficient that the effect of provincial legislation is to do so. However, there are instances where provincial law will continue to apply: :* where the insolvent person is one that plainly falls within provincial jurisdiction (such as a municipal institution), a province has authority to compel reorganizations of bodies and debt obligations :* where a stay under federal law has been lifted in order to allow proceedings to take place, a province can still impose a
moratorium on proceedings that fall under provincial law Issues concerning the extent of federal
paramountcy continue to come before the
Supreme Court of Canada. In the 2015 "paramountcy trilogy," the boundaries were further explored: :* An
Alberta Act was held neither to disqualify a person from driving a motor vehicle or to suspend the registration of such vehicles, because of an unsatisfied personal injury debt that had been discharged in bankruptcy. :* An Ontario Act governing the collection of tolls charged by
407 ETR was held not to apply to bar a discharged bankrupt from renewing his license plates upon payment of normal annual fees. :* However, a
Saskatchewan Act that required creditors to serve a notice of intention, engage in mandatory mediation, and prove that the debtor has no reasonable possibility of meeting its obligations or is not making a sincere and reasonable effort to meet its obligations before it can begin an action with respect to farm land was held not to be inconsistent with the BIA, as
cooperative federalism dictates that provincial legislative power should not be constrained, absent an actual inconsistency. == History and development ==