Simon's Legal Resources

Insolvency (BIA) - Appeal Route - Future Rights [s.193(a)]

. Lozovski v. Equityline Mortgage Investment Corporation

In Lozovski v. Equityline Mortgage Investment Corporation (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal considered several BIA s.193 appeal route issues.

Here the court considers the 'future rights' as-of-right appeal route [BIA s.193(a)]:

2. Meaning of “future rights”

[11] A blanket assertion that future rights will be affected is insufficient. The categories providing an automatic right of appeal have been interpreted narrowly: see Hillmount Capital Inc. v. Pizale, 2021 ONCA 364, 462 D.L.R. (4th) 228, at para. 28. The governing principles are well established.

[12] To affect future rights, the order must involve the future rights of those “with an economic interest in the debtor company – i.e. its creditors or shareholders”: 2403177 Ontario Inc. v. Bending Lake Iron Group Limited, 2016 ONCA 225, 369 D.L.R. (4th) 635, at para. 25. These are rights that cannot be presently asserted but will come into existence at a future date: Bending Lake, at paras. 21-22. They are not procedural rights or commercial advantages that may accrue from the order sought to be challenged on appeal: Business Development Bank of Canada v. Pine Tree Resorts Inc., 2013 ONCA 282, 115 O.R. (3d) 617, at para. 15.

....

[19] Future rights are inchoate, meaning that, while they do not exist now, they might arise in the future: Ravelston Corp. (Re), 2005 CanLII 63802 (ON CA), 24 C.B.R. (5th) 256, at paras. 18-19. The issue of priority between Elle and/or Mr. Ranieri is capable of being determined now. The priority entitlements exist. Schedule B merely reserves the determination of those priorities to a date in the future. As such, any priority entitlements between Elle and Mr. Ranieri are appropriately characterized as presently existing rights that are exercisable in the future: Pine Tree Resorts, at para. 16.