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


 
 

Client Update: Make Your List and Check it Twice: IRAC Sends a Holiday Reminder to Municipalities

December 23, 2015

The Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission (the “Commission”) has issued a holiday reminder to municipalities in Prince Edward Island about the importance of preparation, accuracy, and transparency when making decisions related to land use and…

Read More

Nova Scotia Government Introduces Public Services Sustainability (2015) Act

December 16, 2015

By Brian G. Johnston, QC On the same day that the Nova Scotia government announced its projected deficit had ballooned to $241 million, it also introduced Bill 148, the Public Services Sustainability (2015) Act (“Act”). The stated purposes…

Read More

Striking down the Nova Scotia Cyber-safety Act: The 10 most interesting things about Crouch v Snell

December 16, 2015

By Jennifer Taylor – Research Lawyer Nova Scotia’s Cyber-safety Act1 is no more, after a successful Charterchallenge to the legislation. In Crouch v Snell, 2015 NSSC 340, Justice McDougall of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia found the entire statute—enacted in…

Read More

Forsythe v Westfall: Forum of Necessity & Access to Justice

December 1, 2015

By Jennifer Taylor Introduction: Did Ontario have jurisdiction? Arguments about access to justice are not enough to oust the general principles of jurisdiction, according to a recent Ontario case. In Forsythe v Westfall, 2015 ONCA 810, the…

Read More

Client Update: Nova Scotia Court of Appeal Substantially Reduces Punitive Damages in LTD Case (Plus a Primer on the New Nova Scotia Limitations Act)

November 23, 2015

PART I: THE NSCA DECISION IN BRINE “Disability insurance is a peace of mind contract”: that’s the opening line of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal’s long-awaited decision in Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc…

Read More

Client Update: Taxation of Trusts, Estates and Charitable Donation Rules Changing January 1, 2016

November 18, 2015

The taxation of estates, testamentary trusts and certain “life interest trusts” such as alter ego, joint partner and spousal trusts, and the rules for charitable donations made on death through an estate are changing significantly…

Read More

Update on New Tax Rules for Charitable Giving

November 18, 2015

Several important changes in the tax rules that apply to charitable gifts will be coming into effect in the near future. Some of the new rules take effect in 2016, and others will apply beginning…

Read More

Atlantic Employers’ Counsel – Fall 2015

October 23, 2015

THE EDITORS’ CORNER Michelle Black and Sean Kelly Trick, Treat or … Taunt? Workplace Bullying and Harassment Fall has arrived! The leaves are changing colours, families are stockpiling Halloween candy (some of which will actually last long…

Read More

The Fair Elections Act and #elxn42: A summary of Council of Canadians v Canada (Attorney General)

October 15, 2015

By Jennifer Taylor – Research Lawyer With the federal election just days away, voting is on Canadians’ minds. This will be the first election conducted in accordance with the Fair Elections Act, SC 2014, c 12 [“FEA”] which…

Read More

In the Three Certainties We Trust: The status of Builders’ Lien Act trust claims in bankruptcy

October 9, 2015

By Jennifer Taylor Introduction There is now a Nova Scotia decision on the interplay between the provincial Builders’ Lien Act and the federal Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (“BIA”) in the interesting context of trusts. In Re Kel-Greg Homes Inc, Justice Rosinski…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top