Papick (Re)

Papick (Re)

Registrar found the administrator failed to adequately investigate and monitor the proposal and breached its s.66.251 duties, while OSB shared responsibility; despite no measurable creditor loss the administrator's maladministration warranted a reduction of fees, and the administrator was awarded $1,300 plus GST.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2007 BCSC 818
Parties
Debtor: Sharon Marie Papick; Administrator of the Consumer Proposal: Abakhan & Associates Inc.; Official Receiver: Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Consumer Proposal (division Ii) Under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (bia) / Taxation of Administrator's Fees Before the Registrar
Outcome
Taxation granted in part; administrator's fees reduced and awarded at $1,300 plus GST; disbursements allowed
Legal Topics
Administration of Consumer Proposal, Taxation of Trustee/administrator Fees, Annulment of Proposals, Default and Notices to Creditors, Interpretation of Payment Clause
Source Language
english
Bankruptcy and Insolvency Administrative Law Professional Fees and Taxation Administration of Consumer Proposal Taxation of Trustee/administrator Fees Annulment of Proposals Default and Notices to Creditors Interpretation of Payment Clause

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sharon Marie Papick

Debtor

Abakhan & Associates Inc.

Administrator of the Consumer Proposal

Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy

Official Receiver

Procedural Posture

Consumer Proposal (division Ii) Under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (bia) / Taxation of Administrator's Fees Before the Registrar

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the administrator is entitled to the claimed fees
  2. 2 Whether the administrator breached duties under s.66.251 of the BIA by failing to investigate and notify creditors of changed circumstances
  3. 3 Effect of inconsistent positions and actions by the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy on administration

Ratio Decidendi

Registrar found the administrator failed to adequately investigate and monitor the proposal and breached its s.66.251 duties, while OSB shared responsibility; despite no measurable creditor loss the administrator's maladministration warranted a reduction of fees, and the administrator was awarded $1,300 plus GST.

Court Disposition

Taxation granted in part; administrator's fees reduced and awarded at $1,300 plus GST; disbursements allowed

Orders

  • Administrator entitled to fees of $1,300 plus GST
  • Disbursements claimed are allowed