Canada: When Is A Corporation Not A Corporation?

Last Updated: February 28 2017
Article by Mark Wilson

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice (the "Court") in its recent decision in Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation has reaffirmed the nature of the legal relationship between a parent corporation and its subsidiary corporation. That relationship reflects fundamental principles of corporate law, as well as modern commercial relations.

Background

The Litigation

The plaintiffs in Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation represented approximately 30,000 Ecuadorean villagers who live in a region of Ecuador that suffered environmental pollution as the result of the activities of oil companies from the 1960s to 1990s. These plaintiffs were successful in litigation in Ecuador and obtained a judgement (the "Ecuadorean Judgement") of US$9.5 billion against Chevron Corporation ("Chevron").

Chevron refused to acknowledge or pay the Ecuadorean Judgement. Chevron has no assets in Ecuador. As a result, in 2012, the plaintiffs commenced an action before the Court for the recognition and enforcement of the Ecuadorean Judgement against Chevron, Chevron Canada Limited ("Chevron Canada") and another Chevron subsidiary.

In the Ontario action, the plaintiffs sought, among other things:

  1. the Canadian equivalent of US$9.5 billion resulting from the Ecuadorean Judgement against Chevron;
  2. a declaration that the shares of Chevron Canada were available to satisfy the Ecuadorean Judgement, should it be enforced in Ontario; and
  3. the appointment of an equitable receiver over the shares and assets of Chevron Canada.

Chevron and Chevron Canada

Chevron is a Delaware public corporation with its head office in California. Its principal business is the holding of shares in subsidiary corporations and managing those investments. Chevron does not itself engage in the exploring, producing, refining or marketing of petroleum products; those activities are carried on by its many indirect subsidiaries.

Chevron has never been registered to carry on business in Ontario or anywhere else in Canada. With the exception of its interest in two Bermudian companies, all of Chevron's assets are owned and located in the United States. It files consolidated financial statements in accordance with applicable laws in the United States.

Chevron Canada is a seventh level, indirect subsidiary of Chevron, amalgamated under the Canada Business Corporations Act (the "CBCA"). Its major business activities involve petroleum and natural gas exploration in Canada. It has never carried on business in Ecuador and played no role in the events leading up to the Ecuadorean Judgement, nor had it any connection to the legal proceedings leading to the Ecuadorian Judgement. All of the shares of Chevron Canada are owned by Chevron Canada Capital Company, which was not a party to the proceedings before the Court.

Chevron and Chevron Canada have separate and independent boards of directors, and none of the Chevron directors or executive officers serves on the board or is involved in managing the operations of Chevron Canada.

The Law in Question

Under the CBCA, the statute governing Chevron Canada, a corporation has the capacity, and subject to the CBCA, the rights, powers and privileges of a natural person. As such, it is a legal entity distinct and separate from its shareholders. Chevron Canada relied upon this "corporate separateness" to argue that any judgement against Chevron (i.e., the Ecuadorean Judgement) was not also a judgement against Chevron Canada.

Attempts are sometimes made, usually by creditors, to get courts to look past the legal distinctiveness of a corporation in order to obtain control of the assets of the corporation, even though the corporation has no direct connection with the litigating party. This effort has been termed "piercing the corporate veil".

The Execution Act (Ontario) (the "Execution Act") provides that "the sheriff may seize and sell any equitable or other right, property, interest or equity of redemption in or in respect of any goods, chattels or personal property, including leasehold interests in any land of the execution debtor...". The plaintiffs contended that this language in the Execution Act entitles the sheriff to seize any property in which the judgement-debtor has a direct or indirect legal or beneficial interest, such as, in the context of the Ecuadorean Judgement, Chevron's indirect beneficial interest in Chevron Canada.

The Contending Positions of the Parties

The parties agreed that the Court had to decide two issues: (i) were the shares and assets of Chevron Canada available for execution and seizure pursuant to the Execution Act in order to satisfy the Ecuadorean Judgement; and (ii) if they were not, should Chevron Canada's "corporate veil" be "pierced" so that its shares and assets were available to satisfy the Ecuadorean Judgement?

The plaintiffs submitted that Chevron Canada is an asset of Chevron that was available for execution and seizure pursuant to the Execution Act in orderto satisfy the Ecuadorean Judgement. As an alternative argument, the plaintiffs submitted that the court should pierce Chevron Canada's corporate veil to make its shares and assets available to satisfy the Ecuadorean Judgement because of Chevron's effective control over Chevron Canada and the injustice that would result from applying the "corporate separateness" principle to Chevron in the circumstances of the case.

Chevron Canada submitted that the plaintiffs' claims against it should be dismissed because:

  1. Chevron Canada was not a party to the Ecuadorean proceeding;
  2. Chevron Canada was not a judgement-debtor under the Ecuadorean Judgement;
  3. the plaintiffs did not allege any wrongdoing against Chevron Canada;
  4. Chevron Canada is its own separate legal entity, distinct from Chevron, and therefore its shares and assets do not belong to Chevron; and
  5. the plaintiffs' claim was barred by the legal principle of corporate separateness and that there was no basis to pierce Chevron Canada's corporate veil to make either its shares or assets available to satisfy the Ecuadorean Judgement.


The Decision of the Court

The Court decided that (i) Chevron Canada is not an asset of Chevron, and (ii) circumstances did not merit piercing the corporate veil of Chevron Canada.

Chevron Canada Not an Asset of Chevron

In ruling that Chevron Canada is not an asset of Chevron, the Court reiterated basic principles of corporate law, while interpreting the function of the Execution Act:

"Chevron Canada's incorporating statute, the CBCA, gives it all the rights, powers and privileges of a natural person...

Chevron Canada is not an asset of Chevron. It is a separate legal person. It is not an asset of any other person including its own parent, [Chevron Canada Capital Company]. The Supreme Court of Canada confirmed this in BCE Inc. v. 1976 Debentureholders, where the court stated, 'While the corporation is ongoing, shares confer no right to its underlying assets.'

The Execution Act, which is a procedural statute, does not create any rights in property but merely provides for the seizure and sale of property in which a judgement-debtor already has a right or interest. It does not establish a cause of action against Chevron Canada. Chevron Canada is not the judgement-debtor under the Ecuadorean judgement and, therefore, the Execution Act does not apply to it with respect to that judgement. The Execution Act does not give Chevron any right or interest, equitable or otherwise, in the shares or assets of Chevron Canada."

Based upon these principles, the Court held that Chevron has "no legally recognized interest in Chevron Canada's assets unless the corporate veil between the two companies is pierced."

Piercing the Corporate Veil

Before analysing whether the corporate veil between Chevron and Chevron Canada should be pierced, as the plaintiffs claimed was appropriate, the Court made the following observations about the "corporate separateness" of Chevron and Chevron Canada:

  • Chevron and Chevron Canada are separate legal entities with separate rights and obligations. The principle of corporate separateness has been recognized and respected in the common law since 1896.
  • The principle of corporate separateness applies equally to groups of companies such as Chevron's group of companies, of which Chevron Canada is a part.
  • The principle of corporate separateness provides that shareholders of a corporation are not liable for the obligations of the corporation. It also provides that the assets of the corporation are owned exclusively by the corporation, not the shareholders of the corporation. As a result, Chevron does not have any legal or equitable interest in the assets of Chevron Canada as an indirect shareholder of Chevron Canada.

As the principle of "corporate separateness" applies to Chevron and Chevron Canada, the Court held that for the plaintiffs to succeed (i.e., have the corporate veil between the two companies pierced) the plaintiffs had to prove:

  1. that Chevron Canada was "completely controlled and dominated" by Chevron (which requires more than ownership) (the "Control Requirement"); and
  2. that Chevron Canada was being used by Chevron "as a shield for fraudulent or improper conduct" (the "Improper Conduct Requirement"). Simply claiming that it was just and equitable to pierce the corporate veil was not enough.

The Court concluded that the plaintiffs had failed to satisfy the Control Requirement because, among other facts:

  • The management of Chevron Canada operates its business in a fashion which is separate and distinct from that of its parents up the Chevron corporate "family tree", subject to the direction of its own board of directors which does not contain any over-lapping members with the Chevron board or executive.
  • Chevron Canada employs, trains and directs the activities of its own professional, operational and administrative staff; it pays their salaries and benefits, and it provides workers' compensation coverage as required.
  • As part of a worldwide "family" of companies, Chevron Canada is subject to certain "family" budget reporting requirements and large capital expenditure approval processes, but it initiates its own plans and budgets, it funds its own day to day operations, and the capital expenditures made by it for the major Athabasca Oil Sands Project, Hibernia Project and Hebron Project were funded from its own operating revenues.
  • Chevron Canada is a fully capitalized corporation which funds its own day to day operations, without financial contributions from Chevron or any other Chevron entity.
  • Chevron Canada files its own tax returns and corporate statements.
  • Chevron files a consolidated set of financial statements because it is required to do so by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission and the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation.
  • The provision of guarantees by Chevron for Chevron Canada underscored their separate existence.

The Court also concluded that activities such as central review and approval for capital expenditures, cross guarantee of debt and payment of dividends did not, in and of themselves, demonstrate complete control and domination of a subsidiary by its parent.

With respect to the Improper Conduct Requirement, the Court observed that the plaintiffs had not even alleged that Chevron's corporate group structure was suspect:

"The plaintiffs do not allege that the corporate structure of which Chevron Canada is part was designed or used as an instrument of fraud or wrongdoing. In fact, they specifically plead that they 'do not allege any wrongdoing against Chevron Canada'. As such, they cannot establish wrongdoing akin to fraud in the corporate structure between Chevron and Chevron Canada. They therefore do not meet this fundamental condition of piercing Chevron Canada's corporate veil."

In conclusion, the Court declined to pierce the corporate veil between Chevron and Chevron Canada:

" ... applicable jurisprudence makes it clear that even if the plaintiffs were able to establish that Chevron exercises total effective control over Chevron Canada, which they have not done, this would not satisfy the test for ignoring Chevron Canada's corporate separateness and piercing its corporate veil. There would also have to be wrongdoing "akin to fraud" to meet the test. There is no such wrongdoing in this case."

Conclusion

In Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation the Court reaffirmed the legal principle of the "separateness" of a corporation from its shareholders. As previously stated, that relationship is a fundamental aspect of corporate law, as well as modern commercial relations.

The distinction of a corporation from its shareholders defines a corporation's relationship with those with whom it carries on business and otherwise affects. The Court agreed with the following submission by Chevron:

"If the Plaintiff's position regarding the effect of section 18(1) of the Execution Act is accepted, the assets of Ontario subsidiaries of both domestic and foreign companies would automatically and always be subject to execution orders to satisfy judgements against their parent companies. In fact, the debts of individual shareholders could be enforced against the assets of any Ontario company. This result is not only contrary to law, it would have startling and stark consequences for Ontario's businesses and their ability to attract investment."

For those structuring the operations of companies in corporate group structures, the Court's decision offers comfort that the exercise is worthwhile. The organization of assets and businesses in a corporate group structure can be undertaken for a variety of legitimate reasons. If this appropriate structuring also takes place in the absence of litigation or the threat of litigation, Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation predicts that a creditor will only have recourse against the corporation in the corporate group directly involved in its dispute, and not against any of its affiliated companies.

The Court's decision, paradoxically, might also have negative consequences for shareholders in situations where they wish to exert their influence over a corporation's affairs.

For example, under the CBCA and similar Canadian corporate law statutes, the sale, lease or exchange of "all or substantially all" of the property of a corporation other than in the ordinary course of business of the corporation requires the approval of the corporation's shareholders by special resolution. If a parent corporation has placed an intermediary holding company between it and an operating subsidiary (like Chevron was separated from Chevron Canada), the parent could argue that only the approval of the intermediary holding company (which is controlled by the parent) is required for the sale, lease or exchange of the property of the operating company, rather than the approval of the shareholders of the parent company, because it is inappropriate (according to Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation) to characterize the property of the operating subsidiary as the property of the parent. This could be significant if the shareholders of the parent do not approve of the sale, lease or exchange of the operating subsidiary's property. If those shareholders tried to contest the transaction, the parent could argue that Yaiguaje v. Chevron Corporation mandates that those shareholders can only vote to approve a transaction involving the parent's property, not a transaction involving the property of its subsidiaries.

Significant asset sale, lease or exchange transactions are common. The ability to frustrate the exercise of shareholder approval of these transactions because of the structure of the corporate group is a significant potential constriction of shareholder rights. Interestingly, the Delaware corporate statute has been amended to specifically give shareholders of a parent corporation the right to approve a transaction involving a subsidiary. To date, Canadian corporate statutes have not been similarly amended.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions