|
Canadian Immigration Consultants |
Immigroup |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
Home > Business > Articles |
d | ||||
|
2004 Corporate Finance Law Developments
DISCLAIMER - The information provided here is of a general nature and may not apply to any specific or particular situation. It is not to be considered as a legal advice nor presumed to be indefinitely up to date.
The
year 2004 saw a continuation of the very strong Canadian income fund
market, with approximately 35 new income funds taken public. The market
for cross-border income funds using innovative structures designed to
solve the complexities of cross-border tax issues has been slower to take
off than was predicted last year. Mergers and acquisitions activity has
been brisk, with significant transactions such as the merger of Molson and
Coors, the combination of BFI Canada Income Fund and IESI Corporation, the
acquisition by Nexen of Encana's North Sea assets, the acquisition by CHUM
of Craig Media and the acquisition by Midnight Oil and Gas of Vintage
Petroleum.
1.
Kerr v. Danier Leather Inc.
Kerr
v. Danier Leather Inc. ("Danier") is a landmark case for
Canadian securities law. When certified as a class action under the Class
Proceedings Act (Ontario) in 2001, it became one of the first
securities class actions in Canada. In May 2004, Danier became one
of the few class actions to proceed to trial resulting in a judgment on
the common issues certified by the certification motions judge. Danier
is one of the few civil judgments under Canada's securities legislation
and one of the few cases dealing with the so-called due diligence defence.
Because the judgment deals with liability for a forecast in a prospectus,
it is also a precedent-setting decision. Finally, the decision is
noteworthy because of Justice Lederman's reference to and reliance on the
common law and on U.S. decisions in interpreting the civil liability
provisions of the Securities Act (Ontario). The
Facts
In
connection with its IPO, Danier prepared three preliminary prospectuses
over the period from November 1997 to April 1998. The final prospectus was
dated May 6, 1998. The offering was completed on May 20, 1998.
Forecast
as a Representation
The
law only imposes liability for a misrepresentation of a present fact. A
statement about the future will generally not support a claim for
misrepresentation. Therefore, one might conclude that a forecast, being a
prediction of the future, could not be the basis for a claim for
misrepresentation.
Materiality
Under
the Securities Act, a misrepresentation of fact can only give rise
to liability if it is "material." In essence, the same is true
at common law. Danier argued that its forecasts could not be material
because of cautionary language that appeared in the prospectus. The
cautionary language is in fact a requirement imposed by National Policy
48, the securities regulators' policy governing the disclosure of
forward-looking financial information.
|
|||||
|
Home | Firm | Services | Representation | WorkVisas | ImmigrationVisas | Business | Employment | Govt | Sitemap | Archive | Contact | Disclaimer |
|||||