BCE JUDGMENT -- SUPREME COURT OF CANADA

"The trial judge’s approval of the plan of arrangement [Bell Canada borrowing 30 billion] is affirmed."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[Lot more complicated than affirming judgement. Specifics about arrangement, and leverage buy-out debt rights, need clarificiation. How much debt can be added to Bell Canada? If leverage buy-out investing 5 or more billion of their own currency into buying BCE, debt not 30 billion, unless more debt is being booked to Bell Canada, beyond leverage buyout, for example. Or, if leverage buy-out buyers acquiring BCE shares currencly as less than 42.75, then buyout costs less, reduce size of debt; then not entilted to add 30 billion to Bell Canada balance sheet debt.]

[Not right that the BCE Debenture loan agreement debt clauses ignored. Not to tackle BCE Debenture loan agreement section 5.09 limiting Bell Canada, makes it unclear for banks Bell Canada's debt standing.]





~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SUPREME COURT OF CANADA ‑‑ JUDGMENT IN APPEAL

OTTAWA, 2008-06-20. THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA HAS TODAY DEPOSITED WITH THE REGISTRAR JUDGMENT IN THE FOLLOWING APPEAL.

FROM: SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (613) 995‑4330
COMMENTS/COMMENTAIRES: comments@scc-csc.gc.ca

APPEAL:32647 BCE Inc., et al. v. A Group of 1976 Debentureholders, et al. - and - Director Appointed Pursuant to the CBCA, Catalyst Asset Management Inc. and Matthew Stewart (Que.) Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Abella and Charron JJ.


The appeals from the judgments of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montréal), Numbers 500‑09‑018525‑089 and 500‑09‑018527‑085, dated May 21, 2008, heard on June 17, 2008, are allowed with costs throughout. The decision of the Court of Appeal is set aside and the trial judge’s approval of the plan of arrangement is affirmed.

The cross-appeals from the judgments of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montréal), Numbers 500‑09‑018524‑082 and 500‑09‑018526‑087, dated May 21, 2008, heard on June 17, 2008, are dismissed with costs throughout.

Reasons to follow.



[Dissent opinion on costs. Apllication to grant a buyer's subject, is free? BCE had to clarify Bell Canada's debt standing, not fair for BCE Debenture holders to pay this cost. Note if BCE debentures are found to have right to limit Bell Canada Debt, could Debentureholders sue BCE and leverage buyout for claiming right?]