Lafontaine (Re)

Lafontaine (Re)

The Master found the lease extension clearly expired on October 29, 2007 so on the date of the bankrupt's assignment (October 30, 2007) GMAC held title to the vehicle rather than a mere security interest; the secured proof filing reflected procedural caution and did not defeat GMAC's property claim; the trustee's dispute of the property claim was not timely (71 days), therefore the disallowance of the property proof was overturned and the vehicle must be released to GMAC.

Citation
2008 BCSC 1461
Parties
Trustee: Willis Associates Insolvency Services Ltd.; Appellant/creditor: GMAC Leaseco Corporation; Bankrupt: Yves Joseph Levis Lafontaine
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy Appeal Concerning Disallowance of Proofs of Claim / Appeal Heard in Chambers (oral Reasons) Before Master/registrar
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part: property proof of claim accepted; security proof unnecessary; trustee's disallowance of property claim overturned; vehicle ordered released to GMAC; costs awarded.
Legal Topics
Proofs of Claim, Ownership Versus Security Interest, Lease Extension Interpretation, Timeliness of Trustee's Notice of Dispute, Costs in Bankruptcy Proceedings
Source Language
English
Bankruptcy and Insolvency Property Law Personal Property Security Proofs of Claim Ownership Versus Security Interest Lease Extension Interpretation Timeliness of Trustee's Notice of Dispute Costs in Bankruptcy Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Willis Associates Insolvency Services Ltd.

Trustee

GMAC Leaseco Corporation

Appellant/creditor

Yves Joseph Levis Lafontaine

Bankrupt

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy Appeal Concerning Disallowance of Proofs of Claim / Appeal Heard in Chambers (oral Reasons) Before Master/registrar

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether GMAC owned the vehicle on the date of bankruptcy or merely held a security interest
  2. 2 Whether filing a secured proof of claim constituted an election barring assertion of a property claim
  3. 3 Whether the trustee's notice of dispute was given within the time required by the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act

Ratio Decidendi

The Master found the lease extension clearly expired on October 29, 2007 so on the date of the bankrupt's assignment (October 30, 2007) GMAC held title to the vehicle rather than a mere security interest; the secured proof filing reflected procedural caution and did not defeat GMAC's property claim; the trustee's dispute of the property claim was not timely (71 days), therefore the disallowance of the property proof was overturned and the vehicle must be released to GMAC.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part: property proof of claim accepted; security proof unnecessary; trustee's disallowance of property claim overturned; vehicle ordered released to GMAC; costs awarded.

Orders

  • Allow GMAC's property proof of claim and overturn trustee's disallowance
  • Order that the 2004 GMC vehicle be released to GMAC Leaseco Corporation