<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>GrossmanCGA - How can I help?court | GrossmanCGA &#8211; How can I help?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://grossmancga.com/site/tag/court/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://grossmancga.com/site</link>
	<description>Independent advice in your best interest</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 18:15:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Executors and Tax Returns:  Rosenberg Estate v. Canada (National Revenue)</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2012/01/06/executors-tax-returns-rosenberg-estate-v-canada-national-revenue/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2012/01/06/executors-tax-returns-rosenberg-estate-v-canada-national-revenue/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 01:40:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[filing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[return]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[terminal]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1985</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Marc Weisman of Torkin Manes LLP As part of my tax and estates practice, I frequently advise executors on tax and estates matters. The recent decision of the Federal Court of Canada in Rosenberg Estate v. Canada (National Revenue) 2011 DTC 5075 highlights the importance of ﬁling ﬁnal tax returns on time to avoid penalties to the estate. This was not a simple estate....]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2012/01/06/executors-tax-returns-rosenberg-estate-v-canada-national-revenue/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Payroll Withholding Taxes – A notice of assessment is not  required for the CRA to enforce collection on unremitted  payroll withholding taxes</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2012/01/06/payroll-withholding-taxes-notice-of-assessment-not-required-for-cra-enforce-collection-on-unremitted-payroll-withholding-taxes/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2012/01/06/payroll-withholding-taxes-notice-of-assessment-not-required-for-cra-enforce-collection-on-unremitted-payroll-withholding-taxes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 01:35:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[assessment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[director]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[payroll]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1984</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Marc Weisman of Torkin Manes LLP In the last two or three years, the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) has been aggressive in its pursuit of corporate taxpayers and their directors for unremitted payroll withholding taxes and goods and services taxes. As part of our tax practice, we have acted for more than 200 corporate and individual taxpayers in these situations, so we take careful...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2012/01/06/payroll-withholding-taxes-notice-of-assessment-not-required-for-cra-enforce-collection-on-unremitted-payroll-withholding-taxes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Retractable Shares: The Unexpected Creditor</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/29/retractable-shares-unexpected-creditor/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/29/retractable-shares-unexpected-creditor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:49:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy and insolvency rules]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canadian Commercial Lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creditor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[priority]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retractable]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1932</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Richard Dusome of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP When structuring a new financing for a corporate borrower, lenders typically obtain postponements from all other creditors and shareholders advancing loans to the proposed borrower.  Postponements establish the lender’s priority to receive payment from the borrower vis-à-vis these other known creditors. However, some shareholders who have not...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/29/retractable-shares-unexpected-creditor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Guarantor Waivers of PPSA Rights in British Columbia</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/29/guarantor-waivers-of-ppsa-rights-british-columbia/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/29/guarantor-waivers-of-ppsa-rights-british-columbia/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:37:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy and insolvency rules]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canadian Commercial Lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guarantee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guarantor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PPSA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1929</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Mike Todd of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP Lenders should be aware that one of the waivers found in most standard form guarantees of certain statutory rights is not effective under the British Columbia Personal Property Security Act (“BCPPSA”). This was the result in the recent BC Supreme Court decision HSBC Bank Canada v. Kupritz. The facts...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/29/guarantor-waivers-of-ppsa-rights-british-columbia/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Banks Have Right To Hold Tight In Paying Cheques &#8211; Ontario Court holds that banks need not bear the risks of cheques being dishonored</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/27/banks-have-right-hold-tight-paying-cheques-ontario-court-holds-that-banks-need-not-bear-risks-of-cheques-being-dishonored/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/27/banks-have-right-hold-tight-paying-cheques-ontario-court-holds-that-banks-need-not-bear-risks-of-cheques-being-dishonored/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 18:09:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canadian Commercial Lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canadian Securities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[benefit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cheques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1927</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Lisa Brost and Jeffrey Levine of McMillan LLP Generally speaking, banks’ customers have no immediate right to the proceeds of the cheques that they deposit. Under the terms of most banking services agreements, banks can place holds on cheques deposited by their clients for a reasonable period of time. Further, even if a hold is...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/27/banks-have-right-hold-tight-paying-cheques-ontario-court-holds-that-banks-need-not-bear-risks-of-cheques-being-dishonored/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sloppy Accounting Costs Developer &#8211; Construction Lien Act Protects Parties Down The Chain</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/27/sloppy-accounting-costs-developer-construction-lien-act-protects-parties-down-chain/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/27/sloppy-accounting-costs-developer-construction-lien-act-protects-parties-down-chain/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accounting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[checks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cheques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[construction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lien]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[remittance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trust]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1920</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Jason J. Annibale and Allison Worone (summer student) of McMillan LLP [Ed. note: I believe this also serves as a cautionary tale for anyone who oversees payments in any industry, not just those subject to construction trusts.] Developers and others with payment obligations in the construction pyramid (payors) can better manage their risk and exposure...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/09/27/sloppy-accounting-costs-developer-construction-lien-act-protects-parties-down-chain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What a Relief! Bozzer v. The Queen &#8211; Waiver of Interest and Penalties</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/08/17/relief-bozzer-v-queen-waiver-of-interest-penalties/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/08/17/relief-bozzer-v-queen-waiver-of-interest-penalties/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Aug 2011 15:51:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[federal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[relief]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxpayer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1876</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Marc Weisman of Torkin Manes LLP The Federal Court of Appeal in Bozzer v. The Queen, 2011 FCA 186 (“Bozzer”), reversing the decision of the Federal Court of Canada (Trial Division), 2010 FC 139, issued a landmark decision on June 2, 2011, changing the landscape for applications for the waiver of interest and penalties...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/08/17/relief-bozzer-v-queen-waiver-of-interest-penalties/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deemed Director &#8211; When a Resignation is Not Enough</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/06/29/deemed-director-when-resignation-not-enough/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/06/29/deemed-director-when-resignation-not-enough/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Jun 2011 15:25:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real estate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[director]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1791</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Eric Koh of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP Introduction A director of a corporation is personally liable under subsection 323(1) of the Excise Tax Act1 (“ETA”) for the failure of the corporation to remit goods and services tax (“GST”).    However, subsection 323(5) imposes a time limit on this liability whereby a director will not be held...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/06/29/deemed-director-when-resignation-not-enough/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Indalex Priority Case Decided — Ontario Court of Appeal Gives Priority to Pension Plan Deficiency Over Secured Lenders</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/04/11/indalex-priority-case-decided-ontario-court-of-appeal-gives-priority-pension-plan-deficiency-over-secured-lenders/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/04/11/indalex-priority-case-decided-ontario-court-of-appeal-gives-priority-pension-plan-deficiency-over-secured-lenders/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Bankruptcy law changes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canadian Commercial Lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CCAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DIP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pension]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1669</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Kevin P. McElcheran of McCarthy Tétrault LLP [Ed.: Concerning Indalex Limited (Re), 2011 ONCA 265] This week, the Ontario Court of Appeal surprised many by deciding that in the context of the CCAA proceedings of Indalex, pension plan deficiency claims can have priority over security held by secured DIP lenders. The Court granted priority for the...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/04/11/indalex-priority-case-decided-ontario-court-of-appeal-gives-priority-pension-plan-deficiency-over-secured-lenders/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Banks are Prohibited by PIPEDA from Disclosing Mortgage Balance to Judgement Creditor of Mortgagor</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/01/18/banks-are-prohibited-by-pipeda-from-disclosing-mortgage-balance-to-judgement-creditor-of-mortgagor/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/01/18/banks-are-prohibited-by-pipeda-from-disclosing-mortgage-balance-to-judgement-creditor-of-mortgagor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 14:58:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Canadian Commercial Lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[demand]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mortgage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PIPEDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1494</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Barbara McIsaac, Q.C., and Nadia Effendi of Borden Ladner Gervais LLP Introduction On January 6, 2011, the Ontario Court of Appeal released a decision affirming the decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice concluding that the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, S.C. 2000, c. 5 (PIPEDA) prohibited a financial institution from disclosing the...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2011/01/18/banks-are-prohibited-by-pipeda-from-disclosing-mortgage-balance-to-judgement-creditor-of-mortgagor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Buy Low, Donate High, Sue to Get Even: More Risks for Recommending Aggressive Tax Avoidance Schemes</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/12/14/buy-low-donate-high-sue-to-get-even-more-risks-for-recommending-aggressive-tax-avoidance-schemes/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/12/14/buy-low-donate-high-sue-to-get-even-more-risks-for-recommending-aggressive-tax-avoidance-schemes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:58:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[benefit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CGA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GAAR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1393</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Stevan Novoselac, John Sorensen and Michelle McBride of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP In a recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court, Lemberg v. Perris,1 Eric and Valerie Lemberg successfully sued their loyal accountant, Michael Perris (&#8220;Perris&#8220;), for breach of fiduciary duty.  Over the course of their almost twenty-year relationship, Perris provided tax and accounting...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/12/14/buy-low-donate-high-sue-to-get-even-more-risks-for-recommending-aggressive-tax-avoidance-schemes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>2010 Tax Avoidance Cases Update</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/12/14/2010-tax-avoidance-cases-update/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/12/14/2010-tax-avoidance-cases-update/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 14:49:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CGA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GAAR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1390</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Douglas J. Powrie and Stephanie Wong of Borden Ladner Gervais LLP The Canadian courts have recently considered appeals of several cases in which the Crown has invoked the general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) to challenge tax avoidance transactions. In Lehigh Cement, the Crown was unable to apply the GAAR because it could not meet its...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/12/14/2010-tax-avoidance-cases-update/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Corporate Divorce Alternative When the Butterfly Won&#8217;t Fly</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/10/21/a-corporate-divorce-alternative-when-the-butterfly-wont-fly/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/10/21/a-corporate-divorce-alternative-when-the-butterfly-wont-fly/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 15:10:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[surplus income]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1294</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[By Pierre Alary of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP  I.   Introduction  Sometimes, two is better than one. A company in dire straits can potentially attain success by dividing itself into two separate entities. Whether the issues plaguing the company are financial or philosophical in nature, a separation of the business should be considered by corporations and...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/10/21/a-corporate-divorce-alternative-when-the-butterfly-wont-fly/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Another Corporate Director/Lender Must Pay</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/10/18/another-corporate-director-must-pay/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/10/18/another-corporate-director-must-pay/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 14:23:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advisors' guides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canadian Commercial Lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[director]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insolvency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[liability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1282</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On October 6, 2010, in Seier v. The Queen, the Tax Court of Canada provided us with one more example of a lender and corporate director who must pay the GST and payroll withholdings arrears of a failed business. In this case, a lender, by realizing on his security, becomes the sole director and shareholder of the borrower...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/10/18/another-corporate-director-must-pay/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PPSA Haircuts &#8211; Part 1: A Spelling Error</title>
		<link>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/09/21/ppsa-haircuts-part-1-a-spelling-error/</link>
		<comments>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/09/21/ppsa-haircuts-part-1-a-spelling-error/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 20:11:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eric Grossman, CGA</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Canadian Commercial Lenders]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bank]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ontario]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PPSA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[securitization]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://grossmancga.com/site/?p=1224</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In Fairbanx Corp. v. Royal Bank of Canada, the Ontario Court of Appeal considered a contest between two registrations under the Personal Property Security Act (Ontario) (&#8220;PPSA&#8220;): a registration made by Fairbanx to perfect its purchase of accounts receivable from the bankrupt debtor and a registration made by Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) in respect...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://grossmancga.com/site/2010/09/21/ppsa-haircuts-part-1-a-spelling-error/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

