Ontario Revives Dissolved Company for Property Matters

Summary#

This Ontario private bill brings back a dissolved company, 2163694 Ontario Ltd., so it can handle property that was in the company’s name. The former sole director and owner, Denise Caron, asked for this because the company was dissolved in 2024 and still has property matters to settle.

• Restores the company as if it had never been dissolved.
• Brings back its property, rights, and duties from the date it was dissolved (September 19, 2024).
• Protects anyone who gained legal rights after the dissolution; their rights stay in place.
• Takes effect as soon as it becomes law.

What it means for you#

• General public

  • No change for most people. This is a narrow bill about one company.

• People dealing with the company’s property (buyers, sellers, real estate agents, lawyers)

  • Property held in the company’s name can be sold, transferred, or refinanced in a normal way again.
  • Title records can be updated without extra workarounds.

• Creditors and business partners

  • You can again make or settle claims with the company.
  • Contracts that were in the company’s name can be acted on and enforced.

• Tenants or service providers with agreements in the company’s name

  • Leases and service agreements can continue under the company as before.
  • Payments and notices can be sent to the revived company.

• Third parties who gained rights after the dissolution

  • Your rights are protected. The revival does not take away rights you legally gained after the company was dissolved.

Expenses#

Estimated public cost: minimal.

• Creates no new programs, staff, or funding.
• Any government work (like updating records) is routine and small.
• Most costs fall on the applicant to pursue the private bill process.

Proponents' View#

• Fixes a practical problem so property in the company’s name can be dealt with properly.
• Restores both assets and duties, so the right party is responsible for contracts and debts.
• Protects people who gained rights after dissolution, keeping things fair for third parties.
• Very narrow in scope, with little to no impact on taxpayers.

Opponents' View#

• Reviving a dissolved company can create uncertainty for people who relied on the company being closed.
• May reopen old debts or disputes, which could lead to legal costs for those involved.
• Uses legislative time for a private matter; some may prefer an administrative solution instead.
• Limited public detail about the property makes it hard to see all possible knock-on effects.