{"title":"弗吉尼亚托里重整破产法:公司债权人安排法的历史。多伦多:多伦多大学出版社,2020年。300页。","authors":"Anna J. Lund","doi":"10.1017/cls.2021.24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Reinventing Bankruptcy Law,Virginia Torrie challenges the orthodox history of The Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”). The CCAA is used in contemporary insolvency practice to liquidate or restructure large businesses. Since the 1980s, courts have adopted a remarkably flexible approach to interpreting the CCAA, justifying their approach on the grounds that the statute’s underlying policy is to facilitate the restructuring of large businesses and thereby prevent the negative repercussions to jobs and local economies that result when businesses are liquidated. Torrie argues that courts have misunderstood the underlying policy of the CCAA, which, she argues, has always been aimed at benefiting secured creditors. Her book is a welcome addition to the small but growing body of historical scholarship on Canadian commercial law. I outline here central points in her analysis. A secured creditor faced with a distressed debtor may more effectively minimize its losses by restructuring the debtor’s obligations (e.g., giving the debtormore time to pay) than by liquidating the debtor (e.g., shutting down the debtor and selling off its assets). Liquidation can be particularly unprofitable during times of generalized economic distress, when there may be little demand for a debtor’s assets. In the early twentieth century in Canada, secured creditors had a contractual right to restructure a debtor’s payment obligations. Secured creditors would purchase bonds issued by a debtor. The bonds were governed by trust deeds, and the trust deed agreements entitled creditors to restructure the underlying debt. In the 1920s and 1930s, in an attempt to attract American investment, some trust deed agreements dropped the restructuring provision.When the Great Depression hit in the 1930s, many businesses were unable to pay their debts and their secured creditors had no effective restructuring tool. The financial fallout threatened the solvency of some of Canada’s big financial institutions because they held bonds issued by the troubled businesses. Failure of these institutions was politically unpalatable, so the federal government passed the CCAA to provide secured creditors with a statutory restructuring remedy. The legal community greeted the CCAAwith scepticism. The statute purported to bind secured creditors, but in the 1930s, most people believed that secured creditors’ remedies were the exclusive purview of provincial governments. To assuage doubters, the federal government referred the legislation to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 1934, the Court upheld the CCAA as a constitutional exercise of the federal government’s bankruptcy and insolvency power. However, the decision did not explicitly address the legislation’s ability to bind secured creditors. Doubts about the CCAA’s constitutionality remained until 1937, when the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council upheld the Farmers’ Creditors Arrangement Act as","PeriodicalId":45293,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","volume":"36 1","pages":"533 - 535"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Virginia Torrie Reinventing Bankruptcy Law: A History of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangements Act. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2020. 300 pp.\",\"authors\":\"Anna J. Lund\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/cls.2021.24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Reinventing Bankruptcy Law,Virginia Torrie challenges the orthodox history of The Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”). The CCAA is used in contemporary insolvency practice to liquidate or restructure large businesses. Since the 1980s, courts have adopted a remarkably flexible approach to interpreting the CCAA, justifying their approach on the grounds that the statute’s underlying policy is to facilitate the restructuring of large businesses and thereby prevent the negative repercussions to jobs and local economies that result when businesses are liquidated. Torrie argues that courts have misunderstood the underlying policy of the CCAA, which, she argues, has always been aimed at benefiting secured creditors. Her book is a welcome addition to the small but growing body of historical scholarship on Canadian commercial law. I outline here central points in her analysis. A secured creditor faced with a distressed debtor may more effectively minimize its losses by restructuring the debtor’s obligations (e.g., giving the debtormore time to pay) than by liquidating the debtor (e.g., shutting down the debtor and selling off its assets). Liquidation can be particularly unprofitable during times of generalized economic distress, when there may be little demand for a debtor’s assets. In the early twentieth century in Canada, secured creditors had a contractual right to restructure a debtor’s payment obligations. Secured creditors would purchase bonds issued by a debtor. The bonds were governed by trust deeds, and the trust deed agreements entitled creditors to restructure the underlying debt. In the 1920s and 1930s, in an attempt to attract American investment, some trust deed agreements dropped the restructuring provision.When the Great Depression hit in the 1930s, many businesses were unable to pay their debts and their secured creditors had no effective restructuring tool. The financial fallout threatened the solvency of some of Canada’s big financial institutions because they held bonds issued by the troubled businesses. Failure of these institutions was politically unpalatable, so the federal government passed the CCAA to provide secured creditors with a statutory restructuring remedy. The legal community greeted the CCAAwith scepticism. The statute purported to bind secured creditors, but in the 1930s, most people believed that secured creditors’ remedies were the exclusive purview of provincial governments. To assuage doubters, the federal government referred the legislation to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 1934, the Court upheld the CCAA as a constitutional exercise of the federal government’s bankruptcy and insolvency power. However, the decision did not explicitly address the legislation’s ability to bind secured creditors. Doubts about the CCAA’s constitutionality remained until 1937, when the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council upheld the Farmers’ Creditors Arrangement Act as\",\"PeriodicalId\":45293,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Law and Society\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"533 - 535\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Law and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.24\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/cls.2021.24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
Virginia Torrie Reinventing Bankruptcy Law: A History of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangements Act. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2020. 300 pp.
In Reinventing Bankruptcy Law,Virginia Torrie challenges the orthodox history of The Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (“CCAA”). The CCAA is used in contemporary insolvency practice to liquidate or restructure large businesses. Since the 1980s, courts have adopted a remarkably flexible approach to interpreting the CCAA, justifying their approach on the grounds that the statute’s underlying policy is to facilitate the restructuring of large businesses and thereby prevent the negative repercussions to jobs and local economies that result when businesses are liquidated. Torrie argues that courts have misunderstood the underlying policy of the CCAA, which, she argues, has always been aimed at benefiting secured creditors. Her book is a welcome addition to the small but growing body of historical scholarship on Canadian commercial law. I outline here central points in her analysis. A secured creditor faced with a distressed debtor may more effectively minimize its losses by restructuring the debtor’s obligations (e.g., giving the debtormore time to pay) than by liquidating the debtor (e.g., shutting down the debtor and selling off its assets). Liquidation can be particularly unprofitable during times of generalized economic distress, when there may be little demand for a debtor’s assets. In the early twentieth century in Canada, secured creditors had a contractual right to restructure a debtor’s payment obligations. Secured creditors would purchase bonds issued by a debtor. The bonds were governed by trust deeds, and the trust deed agreements entitled creditors to restructure the underlying debt. In the 1920s and 1930s, in an attempt to attract American investment, some trust deed agreements dropped the restructuring provision.When the Great Depression hit in the 1930s, many businesses were unable to pay their debts and their secured creditors had no effective restructuring tool. The financial fallout threatened the solvency of some of Canada’s big financial institutions because they held bonds issued by the troubled businesses. Failure of these institutions was politically unpalatable, so the federal government passed the CCAA to provide secured creditors with a statutory restructuring remedy. The legal community greeted the CCAAwith scepticism. The statute purported to bind secured creditors, but in the 1930s, most people believed that secured creditors’ remedies were the exclusive purview of provincial governments. To assuage doubters, the federal government referred the legislation to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 1934, the Court upheld the CCAA as a constitutional exercise of the federal government’s bankruptcy and insolvency power. However, the decision did not explicitly address the legislation’s ability to bind secured creditors. Doubts about the CCAA’s constitutionality remained until 1937, when the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council upheld the Farmers’ Creditors Arrangement Act as
期刊介绍:
The Canadian Journal of Law and Society is pleased to announce that it has a new home and editorial board. As of January 2008, the Journal is housed in the Law Department at Carleton University. Michel Coutu and Mariana Valverde are the Journal’s new co-editors (in French and English respectively) and Dawn Moore is now serving as the Journal’s Managing Editor. As always, the journal is committed to publishing high caliber, original academic work in the field of law and society scholarship. CJLS/RCDS has wide circulation and an international reputation for showcasing quality scholarship that speaks to both theoretical and empirical issues in sociolegal studies.