Revive Closed Company to Restore Property

Summary#

This is a private bill to bring back (revive) a specific Ontario company, Step by Step Investments Inc., that was dissolved in 2022. The bill restores the company as if it had not been dissolved, so it can deal with property and other matters in its name. The broad goal is to let the company handle assets and obligations that existed when it was dissolved.

• Main change: Step by Step Investments Inc. is legally revived and regains all its previous property, rights, and powers.
• The company also resumes all its past debts and duties.
• People who gained legal rights after the company was dissolved keep those rights.
• Timing: The act takes effect on the day it receives Royal Assent.

What it means for you#

• Step by Step Investments Inc. (owners, directors, officers)

  • The company exists again and can own property, sign contracts, sue, and be sued.
  • It can deal with property that was in the company’s name at the time of dissolution.
  • It is responsible again for any past debts and legal duties that existed when it dissolved.

• Creditors and contract partners of the company

  • You may be able to pursue or continue claims against the revived company for debts or obligations that existed at dissolution.
  • Contracts and rights tied to the company at the time of dissolution are restored.

• People who acquired rights after March 30, 2022

  • Your rights are protected. The revival does not take away rights you gained after the dissolution (for example, interests properly obtained during that period).

• General public

  • This bill affects a single company and has little direct impact on the public.

Expenses#

No direct public cost is identified in the available material.

• Any costs appear limited to normal administrative processing already completed as part of passing a private bill.
• The company may face private costs to update filings or manage property and obligations after revival (not detailed in the bill).

Proponents' View#

• The bill appears intended to fix a practical problem: property remained in the company’s name when it was dissolved, and revival lets the company deal with it.
• Restoring the company “as if it had not been dissolved” could make it simpler to settle ownership, contracts, and debts tied to that property.
• Protecting rights gained by others after dissolution helps avoid unfairness to third parties.

Opponents' View#

• One concern is legal complexity: restoring the company back to the date of dissolution may create questions about transactions or obligations during the gap period, even though later-acquired rights are protected.
• Relying on special legislation to revive a single company may be seen as unusual, and the bill does not explain why general administrative remedies were not used.
• The bill does not detail how disputes, if any, from the dissolution-to-revival period will be handled, which could lead to uncertainty.