Skip to content

I have trust issues – pension plan trust claim priorities in bankruptcy in Anthony Capital Corporation (Re), 2021 NLSC 91

Joe Thorne, with the assistance of Stuart Wallace (summer student)

In a bankruptcy, there is inevitable conflict between all manner of creditors with competing claims. Our federal and provincial legislatures have identified certain claims as attracting a higher priority than others – including amounts owed to a pension plan for the bankrupt company’s employees.

In a recent decision, the Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court considered whether the statutory trust created for amounts owing to a pension plan take priority over a secured creditor.

Background

Anthony Capital Corporation and participating companies (“Anthony Capital”) administered an executive pension plan (“Pension Plan”) which was owed approximately $571,900 in outstanding normal costs, special payments and wind-up deficiencies when Anthony Capital became bankrupt.

The Bank of Montreal (“BMO”) held money from the proceeds of sale of two Anthony Capital properties pursuant to mortgages with BMO. The trustees of the Pension Plan applied to the Supreme Court for an order requiring proceeds from those sales to be paid to the Pension Plan.

The $571,900 owing to the Pension Plan included:

  • $454,100 of contributions receivable in respect of normal costs for the period prior to declared wind-up date, including interest (“normal costs”);
  • $45,300 in contributions receivable in respect of special payments owing as established at wind-up, including interest (“special costs”);
  • $42,500 in residual wind-up deficit in the Pension Plan required to complete its termination as ordered November 15, 2016; and
  • $30,000 estimated wind-up expense for actuarial, financial and legal support.

As the Pension Plan was underfunded, if the funds held by BMO were not paid to the Pension Plan, the two pensioners would likely see an 80% reduction in monthly payments.

The parties agreed that the effect of sections 32 of the Pension Benefits Act¹ (“PBA”) and 81.5 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act² (“BIA”):

  • created a deemed trust for all amounts owing to the Pension Plan;
  • gave the Pension Plan a “super-priority” over all other creditors for the normal costs; and
  • all other amounts owed to the Pension Plan constituted a secured claim in the bankruptcy.

The main argument by the Trustee was that all other amounts (i.e. the shortfalls outside of normal costs) were subject to a common law trust. If so, they would fall outside the scope of Anthony Capital’s property in bankruptcy and become available to the Pension Plan.

The decision

Special costs have no super-priority in bankruptcy

Section 81.5 of the BIA creates a super-priority for the “normal costs” of a pension plan. “Normal costs” are defined as “…the cost of benefits, excluding special payments, that are to accrue during a plan year, as determined on the basis of a going concern valuation” (emphasis original in the decision).

Justice Stack quickly dispensed with the Trustee’s argument that special costs fell within s. 81.5 of the BIA, noting that such costs are explicitly excluded within the definitions in the PBA.

There is no common law trust over the amounts owing to the Pension Plan

BMO conceded that s. 32 of the PBA created a deemed trust over all amounts owing to the Pension Plan. However, BMO argued that those amounts were subject to a statutory trust only, and were governed by s. 81.5 of the BIA, which creates a super-priority for normal costs only.

The Trustee argued that the amounts owing under s. 32 of the PBA are properly characterized as subject to a common law trust, and were governed by s. 67 of the BIA. That section effectively removes those amounts from the assets of the bankrupt and from the claims of its creditors.

To determine the issue, Justice Stack reviewed the law regarding creation of a common law trust, including the “three certainties” – certainty of intention, certainty of subject matter and certainty of object.
Justice Stack held that intention and object were met. However, with respect to subject matter, Justice Stack concluded that the Pension Plan claims could only have attached to Anthony Capital’s equity of redemption under its two mortgages (i.e. its right to retake title to the two mortgaged properties after the mortgages were paid). When the two properties were sold by BMO, the alleged subject matter of the trust could no longer be established.

As a result, the common law trust claim over all amounts owing to the Pension Plan failed.

The secured claim for other Pension Plan costs does not survive bankruptcy

Section 32(4) of the PBA creates a “lien and charge” on the assets of Anthony Capital with respect to the amounts owed to the Pension Plan. Those charged amounts are required to be held in trust for the Pension Plan. In Reference re Pension Benefits Act³, the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal confirmed that the s. 32(4) charge was a secured claim.

However, that reference case did not address the status of s. 32(4) claims in a bankruptcy or restructuring. Justice Stack adopted the reasons of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in a similar case⁴ and determined that the Pension Plan administrator was not a “secured creditor” for the purpose of the BIA because the Trustee did not hold the s. 32(4) charge “as security for a debt due or accruing due to” the Trustee. The Trustee was merely the administrator of the Pension Plan; the Trustee was not owed anything by Anthony Capital.

Justice Stack did suggest that the impact of s. 32(4) may be different under the other most popular federal insolvency statute, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.⁵ That question remains open to be determined another day.

Conclusion

Justice Stack ordered:

  • the normal costs of the Pension Plan have a super-priority pursuant to section 81.5 of the BIA;
  • the special costs of the Pension Plan do not have a super-priority pursuant to section 81.5 of the BIA;
  • there is no common law trust over the amounts owing to the Pension Plan; and
  • the lien and charge in s. 32(4) of the PBA do not constitute a secured claim in bankruptcy, and are extinguished.

Impact

Companies nearing insolvency or actual bankruptcy are faced with myriad financial and legal issues. Obligations to employees, both present and past, are amongst the most important.

Determining the competing claims of creditors can be particularly challenging where the “ordinary” priorities are altered by statute – as is the case with employee pension plans.

The main takeaway from this case is that, in a bankruptcy, normal costs of a pension plan have an enhanced priority over all secured and unsecured creditors. When considering the assets and liabilities of a company nearing bankruptcy, particular care should be taken regarding employee obligations.


This article is provided for general information only. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Pensions & Benefits Group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.


¹ SNL 1996, c P-4.01.
² 
RSC 1985, c B-3.
³ Reference re Section 32 of the Pension Benefits Act, 1997, Re, 
2018 NLCA 1.
⁴ General Chemical Canada Ltd., Re, 
2007 ONCA 600.
⁵ 
RSC 1985, c C-36.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Dude, where’s my cure? On the road to benefits coverage of psychedelics

May 3, 2023

Included in Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 12 By Dante Manna[1] Once known for recreational use, psychedelics are slowly gaining medical legitimacy as research emerges on possible therapeutic benefits for mental health…

Read More

Discovery: Atlantic Education & the Law – Issue 12

April 28, 2023

We are pleased to present the twelfth issue of Discovery, Stewart McKelvey’s legal publication targeted to educational institutions in Atlantic Canada. Our lawyers provide insight on a number of topics facing universities and colleges including…

Read More

Raising capital under the Nova Scotia Innovation Equity Tax Credit regime

April 17, 2023

By Kyle S. Hartlen, Gavin Stuttard, and Colton Smith What is the Innovation Equity Tax Credit? The Nova Scotia Innovation Equity Tax Credit (“IETC“) is a non-refundable personal and corporate income credit intended to encourage…

Read More

Changes to Canada’s Competition Act coming into effect this summer: a primer on recent amendments impacting Canadian businesses

April 13, 2023

By Deanne MacLeod, K.C., Burtley G. Francis and David F. Slipp In June 2022, Canada’s federal government enacted a number of changes to the Competition Act (the “Act”) as the first step in a comprehensive…

Read More

Nova Scotia to limit medical notes for employee absences

April 4, 2023

This article was updated on April 19, 2023. By Mark Tector and Ben Currie On April 12, 2023 Bill 256: Patient Access to Care Act received Royal Assent. Schedule B of the Bill is the…

Read More

Recent Amendments to the Prohibition on the Purchase of Residential Property by Non-Canadians Regulations

April 3, 2023

This Thought Leadership article is a follow-up to our January 2023 article on the introduction of the Prohibition on the Purchase of Residential Property by Non-Canadians Act. By Brendan Sheridan On January 1, 2023, the…

Read More

Consultation on potential amendments to the Cannabis Regulations

March 31, 2023

By Kevin Landry and Jahvon Delaney Background On March 25, 2023, the Government of Canada released a Notice of Intent titled Consultation on potential amendments to the Cannabis Regulations. The Notice outlines that Health Canada is…

Read More

New reporting requirements for beneficial ownership of Nova Scotia companies

March 28, 2023

By Kimberly Bungay On April 1, 2023, the Nova Scotia government will proclaim into force Bill 226, which amends the Companies Act (the “Act”) to require companies formed under the Act to create and maintain…

Read More

Abuse of sick leave / failure of employee to participate in accommodation process: Vail v. Oromocto (Town), 2022 CanLII 129486

March 21, 2023

By Chad Sullivan and Kathleen Starke Background A recent decision, Vail v. Oromocto (Town), 2022 CanLII 129486, involved several grievances including an unjust dismissal claim by a firefighter as well as a grievance filed by…

Read More

Underused Housing Tax Act introduces new tax on vacant or underused housing

March 13, 2023

By Stuart Wallace and Kim Walsh On January 1, 2022, the Underused Housing Tax Act (the Act) took effect. The Underused Housing Tax (the UHT) is an annual 1% tax on the value of vacant or…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top