McKibbon v. BDO Canada Limited

McKibbon v. BDO Canada Limited

Leave to appeal was granted because the appellant raised a prima facie meritorious and arguable question of statutory interpretation—whether fraudulent intent is required to establish suppression or concealment under s.41(8) BIA—and the appeal is significant to the parties and bankruptcy practice without unduly hindering proceedings; therefore extension of time and leave to appeal under s.193(e) were ordered.

Citation
2020 BCCA 7
Parties
Appellant (bankrupt): William Edward McKibbon; Respondent (trustee): BDO Canada Limited; Respondent (trustee): Dustin Joslin; Respondent (trustee): Stewart Rennie
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Bankruptcy and Insolvency / Application for Leave to Appeal Under S.193(e) of the BIA From Dismissal of S.41(8) Application to Revoke Trustee Discharge
Outcome
Application for extension of time granted; leave to appeal granted under s.193(e) of the BIA.
Legal Topics
Revocation of Trustee Discharge, Suppression or Concealment of Material Fact, Fraud Requirement for Revocation, Leave to Appeal Under S.193(e) BIA, S.41(8) BIA, S.215 BIA, Summary Administration (bankruptcy Rules S.62)
Source Language
English
Bankruptcy and Insolvency Statutory Interpretation Civil Procedure Tax Revocation of Trustee Discharge Suppression or Concealment of Material Fact Fraud Requirement for Revocation Leave to Appeal Under S.193(e) BIA +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Edward McKibbon

Appellant (bankrupt)

BDO Canada Limited

Respondent (trustee)

Dustin Joslin

Respondent (trustee)

Stewart Rennie

Respondent (trustee)

Procedural Posture

Bankruptcy and Insolvency / Application for Leave to Appeal Under S.193(e) of the BIA From Dismissal of S.41(8) Application to Revoke Trustee Discharge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proof of fraudulent intent is required to revoke a trustee's discharge under s.41(8) BIA
  2. 2 Whether actual knowledge alone suffices to establish suppression or concealment of a material fact under s.41(8)
  3. 3 Whether leave to appeal should be granted under s.193(e) of the BIA

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted because the appellant raised a prima facie meritorious and arguable question of statutory interpretation—whether fraudulent intent is required to establish suppression or concealment under s.41(8) BIA—and the appeal is significant to the parties and bankruptcy practice without unduly hindering proceedings; therefore extension of time and leave to appeal under s.193(e) were ordered.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time granted; leave to appeal granted under s.193(e) of the BIA.

Orders

  • Time to file and serve the notice of motion for leave to appeal and the motion book extended to September 18, 2019.
  • Pursuant to s.193(e) of the BIA, leave to appeal is granted.