The Canadian-controlled private corporation ("GMG") of which the taxpayer was the principal shareholder made a proposal in May 2011 under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act which, when accepted by its creditors, resulted in the interest–bearing unsecured debt owing by GMG to him being extinguished on 30 August 2011. In finding that the resulting capital loss to the taxpayer did not also qualify as a business investment loss ("BIL"), Lamarre J first found that a BIL could not be recognized under the s. 50 branch of the definition as the debt was not owing to him at the end of 2011. The debt also did not qualify as having been disposed of to an arm's length person (in the French version, described as a person with whom the taxpayer does not have a non-arm's length relationship). After noting (at para. 27, TaxInterpretations translation) that
in the absence of subsection 84(9) of the ITA, it can be assumed that a shareholder who deals at arm's length with the small business corporation which redeems or cancels his shares cannot benefit from a BIL
and then (without referring to the English version) stated (at para. 31):
[I]n the absence of a provision analogous to subsection 84(9) applying in the case of a settlement or cancellation of a debt, it seems to me that in simply renouncing his debt the appellant did not dispose of it in favour of anyone; and a fortiori he did not dispose of it in favour of a person with whom he did not have a non- arm's length relationship, or at least he did not so demonstrate.