Asian Concepts Franchising Corporation (Re)

Asian Concepts Franchising Corporation (Re)

The Trustee's valuation methodology was within the range of reasonable approaches and entitled to deference, but admitted calculation errors could not be ignored; correcting those errors increased the unliquidated claim by $368,000. The creditor's expert report was admissible despite formal defects and the appeal by...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2017 BCSC 1452
Parties
Trustee and Applicant: Grant Thornton Limited; Creditor and Appellant: Adrenaline Drive Inc.; Debtor and Appellant: Asian Concepts Franchising Corporation
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 August 2017
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy and Insolvency — Proposal Under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act / Appeal of Trustee's Valuation Under S.135(4) BIA (valuation for Voting Purposes)
Outcome
Adrenaline's appeal allowed in part; Asian Concepts' appeal dismissed; Trustee's Valuation varied
Legal Topics
Proposal Under BIA, Proof of Claim Valuation, Standard of Review, Discount Rates for Present Value, Expert Evidence Admissibility, Contract Renewal Risk, Frustration of Contract, Calculation Errors
Source Language
english
Bankruptcy and Insolvency Franchise Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Valuation of Claims Proposal Under BIA Proof of Claim Valuation Standard of Review +5 more

Source-derived case record

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Grant Thornton Limited

Trustee and Applicant

Adrenaline Drive Inc.

Creditor and Appellant

Asian Concepts Franchising Corporation

Debtor and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy and Insolvency — Proposal Under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act / Appeal of Trustee's Valuation Under S.135(4) BIA (valuation for Voting Purposes)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate standard of review for trustee valuation under s.135(4) BIA
  2. 2 Admissibility and weight of expert valuation critique
  3. 3 Whether Trustee's valuation contained material calculation errors requiring adjustment

Ratio Decidendi

The Trustee's valuation methodology was within the range of reasonable approaches and entitled to deference, but admitted calculation errors could not be ignored; correcting those errors increased the unliquidated claim by $368,000. The creditor's expert report was admissible despite formal defects and the appeal by Adrenaline was allowed to vary the Trustee's valuation accordingly; Asian Concepts' appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Adrenaline's appeal allowed in part; Asian Concepts' appeal dismissed; Trustee's Valuation varied

Orders

  • Trustee's valuation varied: liquidated claim: $65,720.25
  • Trustee's valuation varied: unliquidated claim: $1,057,000.00