Canada: Use Of Roll-Ups In Canadian CCAA Cases Is Hotly Debated

Last Updated: April 23 2018
Article by Caitlin Fell

Co-authored by Ken Rosenstein

When an insolvent company contemplates filing for creditor protection under one of Canada's principle restructuring statutes, it may require interim financing or, as more typically referred to in the U.S., debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing. The availability of, and allowance for, DIP financing in Canada under the proposal provisions of the Bankruptcy & Insolvency Act1 and the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act2 (CCAA) are intended to reflect their statutory objectives, which are to allow a debtor time and breathing space to facilitate a going concern solution that maximizes value for the benefit of all stakeholders.

While DIP financing is far from a new phenomenon in Canada, recent cases have shed light on several emerging issues and trends, including the judicial treatment of roll-ups and creeping roll-ups. The increasing prevalence of roll-ups in Canada is likely directly attributable to their continued use and popularity in the United States. However, cross-border restructuring professionals need to be aware of the key differences between U.S. and Canadian bankruptcy law when seeking approval of a roll-up, either in a dual plenary Chapter 11 and CCAA proceedings or in a Canadian CCAA part IV recognition of a Chapter 11 proceeding.

In Canada, roll-ups and their permutations have been hotly debated largely because there remains a serious question under Canadian restructuring laws as to their use and permissibility.3 Under a roll-up, a DIP lender's prefiling debt or a portion thereof is paid back using proceeds from the DIP facility. The prefiling debt is thereby "rolled" into the DIP facility.

In addition to a true/full or partial roll-up, a DIP lender may also seek approval of a "creeping roll-up." Under a creeping roll-up, instead of DIP proceeds being used directly to pay down prefiling obligations, all of the debtor's cash from operations during the CCAA proceedings is swept by the DIP lender and used to pay down prefiling obligations. Concurrently, there is a corresponding draw on the DIP facility to fund further operations.

Conflicting Court Decisions

The judicial treatment of roll-ups and creeping roll-ups in Canada provides little insight as to their permissibility. On the one hand, it appeared that DIP roll-ups were permissible. In 2010, the Quebec Court in the CCAA proceedings of White Birch Paper Holding Co.4 approved DIP financing and a corresponding superpriority charge, notwithstanding that $50 million of the $140 million DIP proceeds would directly repay and discharge the prefiling asset-based revolving credit facility extended by the DIP lender.

In approving the White Birch DIP facility, the court noted that the priming DIP charge would not secure any obligations that were owing prior to the filing. This decision, however, is contrasted with the CCAA Part IV recognition proceedings of Hartford Computer Hardware Inc, Re,5 where the Ontario Court expressly noted that the roll-up provision would not otherwise be permissible as a result of Section 11.2 of the CCAA. That section expressly provides that a DIP charge may not secure an obligation that exists before the initial order is made.6

Following the court's decision in Hartford, subsequent judicial decisions in Canada seemed to suggest that creeping roll-ups, rather than full roll-ups, were permissible under Section 11.2 of the CCAA. The use of a creeping roll-up appeared to be approved by the Canadian courts on the basis of maintaining the existing cash management system of the debtor in connection with an asset-based lending (ABL) facility. The approval of the continuation of existing cash management appeared to indirectly approve creeping roll-ups under the guise of ABL cash management.

In Comark,7 the Ontario Court approved a DIP financing facility which in essence provided for a creeping roll-up on the basis of an approval of the existing cash management system being used in connection with the company's ABL facility. The existing cash management system in effect prior to the CCAA proceedings required that all cash from margin receivables be swept into a blocked account and applied to the prefiling ABL debt to free up availability for draws on the ABL loan.

The court in Comark approved the creeping roll-up in the context of the existing ABL cash management structure. Accordingly, for Comark to access liquidity in the CCAA proceedings, the company was required to deposit all cash from operations into the blocked account to pay down the prefiling revolver facility. Payments toward the prefiling revolver would result in corresponding availability under the DIP facility extended by the same prefiling secured lender.

Given the varying case law, there has yet to be judicial consensus or a fully reasoned analysis as to the permissibility of roll-ups or creeping roll-ups.

The court accepted that because the prefiling revolver facility was only being reduced with cash Comark generated from its business, the DIP charge would only secure advances made post-filing under the DIP facility. Accordingly, the DIP charge would not secure an obligation that existed prior to the commencement of the CCAA proceedings. The approval of a creeping roll-up in Comark on the basis of maintaining the ABL cash management system was also the basis of the court's approval of a creeping roll-up DIP in the 2016 dual plenary CCAA and Chapter 11 proceedings of Re: Golftown Canada Inc.8

In November 2016, the Ontario Court in Re: Performance Sports Group9 explicitly approved a creeping roll-up (rather than approving it on the basis of cash management in connection with an ABL facility) but drew a distinction between a roll-up and a creeping roll-up. The court noted that a creeping roll-up was permissible under the CCAA, whereas a full roll-up, which uses DIP proceeds to pay prefiling facilities, was prohibited. The court specifically noted that:

Section 11.2(1) of the CCAA provides that security for a DIP facility may not secure an obligation that existed before the order authorizing the security was made. The effect of this provision is that advances under a DIP facility may not be used to repay pre-filing obligations. In this case, the ABL DIP Facility is a revolving facility. Under its terms, receipts from operations of the PSG Entities post-filing may be used to pay down the existing ABL Facility. The applicants submit that in this case, the ABL DIP Facility preserves the pre-filing status quo by upholding the relative pre-stay priority position of each secured creditor. By requiring that the PSG Entities only use post-filing cash receipts to pay down the accrued balance under the revolving credit facility, the ABL DIP Lenders are in no better position with respect to the priority of their pre-filing debt relative to other creditors. I accept that no advances under the ABL DIP Facility will be used to pay pre-filing obligations.10 (emphasis added)

Notwithstanding the court's statement in Re: Performance Sports Group Inc., less than a year later the Ontario Court approved a full roll-up in the dual plenary CCAA and Chapter 11 proceedings of Re: Toys R Us.11 In Toys, the court approved a roll-up whereby approximately $93 million of an outstanding prefiling ABL revolver would be paid by the CCAA applicant's DIP facility. In approving the roll-up, the court noted that:

[W]hile it is proposed for DIP funding to be used to pay out pre-filing lenders (a "takeout DIP") all of the loans that will be secured are fresh advances by the DIP lenders...The court-ordered charge is not being used to improve the security of the pre-filing ABL lenders or to fill any gaps in their security coverage. In my view therefore, the takeout DIP is not prohibited by s. 11.2."12

Given the varying case law, there has yet to be judicial consensus or a fully reasoned analysis as to the permissibility of roll-ups or creeping roll-ups. The issue with respect to the uncertainty surrounding the use of roll-ups has arguably manifested as a result of the varying interpretations of Section 11.2 of the CCAA.

Section 11.2 of the CCAA provides that a DIP charge may not secure an obligation that exists before the order approving the DIP financing is made.13 A plain reading of Section 11.2 results in a narrow restriction on DIPs—that while a DIP charge cannot secure a prefiling obligation, DIP proceeds may, in fact, be used to pay down prefiling indebtedness. The payment of prefiling indebtedness is not the same as securing prefiling indebtedness.

This is consistent with the court's decisions in White Birch and Toys. However, some insolvency practitioners would suggest that the payment of prefiling obligations using DIP proceeds (a roll-up) or using cash from operations (a creeping roll-up) indirectly permits what a debtor cannot do directly—elevate prefiling obligations to superpriority status through their payment in contravention of Section 11.2 of the CCAA.

Making a Case for Roll-ups

As there are fundamental differences between the U.S. Bankruptcy Code and the CCAA, the use of roll-ups or creeping roll-ups is necessarily dependent upon the differing risks a DIP lender is trying to avoid in the U.S. or Canada. In the United States, a roll-up or creeping roll-up of a prefiling facility is often sought to avoid a cramdown of the prefiling facility.

However, in Canada, there is no concept of cramdown under the CCAA. Roll-ups can nonetheless assist a DIP lender in ensuring its prefiling loans cannot be compromised and also to protect a prefiling working capital lender that advances prefiling funds on the strength or value of a debtor's assets, including its receivables and inventory. The logic is that if the working capital lender lent based on asset-based lending formulas, it relied on the recovery of that very collateral for its repayment. In a CCAA proceeding, the level of working capital generated may be reduced, thereby compromising the repayment of the prefiling loan.

The authors contend that roll-ups should be permissible and authorized in Canada in appropriate circumstances, and the court's decisions in White Birch and Toys R Us provide the judicial approval for roll-ups. Notwithstanding the strength of these decisions, cross-border U.S./Canadian practitioners should be mindful that the motives/benefits for obtaining a roll-up in Canada versus the United States will differ.

In addition, to seek approval of a roll-up—whether in a dual CCAA/Chapter 11 proceeding or in a recognition of a Chapter 11 proceeding—demonstrating the following factors may be helpful in seeking approval by the Canadian court of a roll-up/creeping roll-up, which in essence requires convincing the court that there will be appropriate benefits as well as no prejudice to stakeholders as a result of the court authorization of the roll-up:

  1. The monitor can provide an opinion as to the validity and perfection of the prefiling lender's security.
  2. The roll-up or creeping roll-up does not alter the relative priorities of other creditors or appropriate protections for priority claims have been developed.

    1. This factor was key in the Ontario Court's decision in Re: Payless Holdings Inc.14 In Payless, the court refused to recognize an interim DIP order approved under Chapter 11 on the basis that it would be detrimental to Canadian landlord creditors as a result of cross collateralization of the DIP. Under the proposed DIP, Payless Canada Group would effectively become jointly liable with the U.S. Chapter 11 debtors for obligations incurred by the U.S. Chapter 11 debtors under the ABL credit facility prior to the filing date. In addition, the Payless Canada Group would also become liable for new obligations of the U.S. Chapter 11 debtors incurred in connection with the DIP ABL credit facility. In refusing to recognize the DIP in Canada, the court noted that approval of roll-ups of any kind will be limited to situations where there is no alteration of the status quo.15
  3. The DIP lender is not obtaining an undue advantage relative to other creditors.
  4. Stakeholders are given adequate notice of the DIP approval motion which includes the roll-up or creeping roll-up so that stakeholders who may believe they are prejudiced can express their concern.
  5. The availability of a mechanic which can reverse the roll-up in the event of a successful challenge by other creditors as to the validity, enforceability, extent, perfection, or priority of the prefiling lender's claims (i.e., the actual roll-up cannot occur until after the comeback hearing in a CCAA proceeding).

    1. In Payless, the debtors attempted to structure the DIP so that priorities were not altered. This was done by granting the major supplier a critical vendor charge. In addition, unsecured trade creditors were protected by the unsecured creditors' charge. Employees were to be paid in the ordinary course and were protected by the prepetition wages and benefits order. However, the issue in Payless was that the landlords had no comparable protection from the impact of the roll-up. They only had an unsecured promise from Payless.

While it appears that Canada is slowly moving toward the U.S. model in that roll-ups and creeping roll-ups are more regularly approved by Canadian courts, there is still a lack of judicial consensus as to whether roll-ups and creeping roll-ups are permitted under Canadian law. U.S. restructuring professionals and lenders should be aware that: (i) approval of a roll-up or creeping roll-up is not a certainty in Canada; and (ii) there are differing uses for roll-ups in Canada relative to the United States, given that Canadian restructuring statutes do not have the concept of adequate protection or cramdown.

Notwithstanding these differences, roll-ups can still be an important feature to manage credit risk when lending to Canadian companies in an insolvency proceeding.


1 RSC, 1985, c B-3 [BIA].

2 RSC, 1985, c C-36 [CCAA].

3 See Re Stelco Inc. et al — Court File No. 04-CL-5306.

4 White Birch Paper Holding Co, Re, 2010 QCCS 1176 [White Birch].

5 Hartford Computer Hardware Inc, Re, 2012 ONSC 964 (SCJ [Commercial List]) [Hartford].

6 Ibid at para 10.

7 Comark Inc., Re, 2015 ONSC 2010, (SCJ) [Comark].

8 Re: Golftown Canada Inc, Court File No.: CV-16-11527-00CL (OSCJ [Commercial List]).

9 Performance Sports Group Ltd., Re, 2016 ONSC 6800 (SCJ [Commercial List]).

10 Ibid at para 22.

11 Re Toys R Us (Canada) Ltd., 2017 ONSC 5571 (SCJ [Commercial List]) [Toys].

12 Ibid at para 10.

13 CCAA, supra note 1, s 11.2(1).

14 Payless Holdings Inc. LLC, Re, 2017 ONSC 2321, (SCJ) [Payless].

15 Ibid at paras 43 and 44.

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

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

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
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
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
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 (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

To Use 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.


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.


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