Ontario civil | Appeal
LEAVE TO APPEAL
Order requiring joint trial did not infringe court’s independence
This was motion for leave to appeal order made in proceedings under Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Can.). Motion judge approved allocation protocol, which provided for joint trial by Superior Court of Justice in Ontario and United States Bankruptcy Court for District of Delaware. Joint trial would determine issue of how to allocate more than US $7 billion in proceeds currently held in escrow. Allocation issue must be resolved before creditors could receive any meaningful distribution from debtors’ estates. Leave to appeal refused. Order requiring joint trial did not infringe Ontario court’s independence and sovereignty. Relevant agreement between parties did not contain agreement to submit allocation issue to binding arbitration. Agreement was broad enough to establish that allocation issue could be resolved by joint trial before Ontario and Delaware courts. Majority of stakeholders were prepared to proceed with joint trial. Granting leave to appeal would impose additional costs and would further delay proceedings.
Nortel Networks Corp., Re (Jun. 20, 2013, Ont. C.A., S.T. Goudge J.A., J.C. MacPherson J.A., and R.G. Juriansz J.A., File No. CA M42415) Leave to appeal from 227 A.C.W.S. (3d) 97 was refused. 230 A.C.W.S. (3d) 125.
Order requiring joint trial did not infringe court’s independence
This was motion for leave to appeal order made in proceedings under Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Can.). Motion judge approved allocation protocol, which provided for joint trial by Superior Court of Justice in Ontario and United States Bankruptcy Court for District of Delaware. Joint trial would determine issue of how to allocate more than US $7 billion in proceeds currently held in escrow. Allocation issue must be resolved before creditors could receive any meaningful distribution from debtors’ estates. Leave to appeal refused. Order requiring joint trial did not infringe Ontario court’s independence and sovereignty. Relevant agreement between parties did not contain agreement to submit allocation issue to binding arbitration. Agreement was broad enough to establish that allocation issue could be resolved by joint trial before Ontario and Delaware courts. Majority of stakeholders were prepared to proceed with joint trial. Granting leave to appeal would impose additional costs and would further delay proceedings.
Nortel Networks Corp., Re (Jun. 20, 2013, Ont. C.A., S.T. Goudge J.A., J.C. MacPherson J.A., and R.G. Juriansz J.A., File No. CA M42415) Leave to appeal from 227 A.C.W.S. (3d) 97 was refused. 230 A.C.W.S. (3d) 125.
