This thesis examines creditors' use of the oppression remedy under the Canada Business Corporations Act and its provincial equivalents from historical and critical perspectives, assesses the consequences of the increasing willingness of Canadian courts to make the remedy available to creditors and concludes by offering some solutions to the problems that are identified. Part I traces the historical development of the oppression remedy, first in the United Kingdom and then in common law Canada. Next, the current state of the law relating to the oppression remedy is briefly examined, followed by a review of recent developments with respect to the use of the oppression remedy by creditors. Part II is a critical review of the evolving law with respect to creditors' use of the oppression remedy. This part of the thesis focuses on: (i) the relationship and potential conflict between the oppression remedy and other available remedies; and (ii) the impact of creditors' uses of the oppression remedy on the relationship between the corporation and its other stakeholders, including issues of shareholders' and directors' liability. In Part III, it is argued that the present use of the oppression remedy by creditors is not being developed in a coherent and principled manner. Certain guidelines are offered to provide the courts with reasonable controls on and principles to guide the use of the oppression remedy by creditors. In particular, it is argued that the oppression remedy should not be available to creditors when there are, either under corporate legislation or other, general legislation, appropriate remedies already available. The result would be that the oppression remedy should be available to creditors only in the limited category of cases where the creditor has no other effective remedy and the conditions for the use of the oppression remedy are met.

No description available.