This short private Act addresses the legal status of one corporation formerly dissolved under Ontario’s Business Corporations Act. The statute sets out how the corporation will be treated going forward and identifies the effective date for that change.
The measure matters to anyone who dealt with the company, the applicants who sought revival, and parties with claims or property interests during the period of dissolution: it determines whether old contracts, liabilities, licences and assets survive and who can enforce them.
At a Glance
What It Does
The Act restores the named corporation to the position it occupied immediately before its voluntary dissolution, including its property, rights and liabilities, but it protects any rights acquired by third parties after the company was dissolved. It also provides that the Act comes into force on the day it receives Royal Assent.
Who It Affects
Directly affected stakeholders include the former directors and shareholders who applied for revival, creditors and claimants with outstanding or potential claims against the corporation, parties who transacted with the corporation during its dissolution, and corporate counsel handling title, contract and corporate registry matters in Ontario.
Why It Matters
Revival eliminates the legal extinction created by voluntary dissolution and can reopen enforcement avenues or revive obligations that parties thought ended; at the same time the carve-out for rights acquired after dissolution preserves finality for certain third-party transactions. For lawyers and compliance teams this shapes exposure, title searches, and litigation strategy.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act is a private, single-corporation statute that responds to an application by two individuals who say they were the directors and shareholders when the company wound up. The company in question dissolved voluntarily on July 26, 2023 under the Business Corporations Act; the applicants asked the Legislative Assembly to pass a statute to undo that dissolution so the corporation can carry on business in its name.
Substantively, the statute declares the corporation revived and restores it “to its legal position” as of the dissolution date. Practically that means property, franchises, licences, contracts and liabilities that belonged to the corporation at dissolution are treated as if the company had never been dissolved.
The Act, however, explicitly preserves any rights that third parties acquired after dissolution—so purchasers or other parties who acquired rights during the interim keep those rights.Because the Act takes effect on Royal Assent, the revival is immediate once the Lieutenant Governor signs it into law. The statute does not set out additional procedures (for example, it does not prescribe notice to creditors, require re-filing of corporate documents, or amend tax or regulatory filing obligations).
Those practical steps—reinstating corporate registrations, reissuing licences, or updating titles—remain matters for the company and for administrative agencies or registries to handle under existing rules.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The applicants named in the preamble are Bijun Gong and Zhenyu Gong; they applied for special legislation to revive 1976998 Ontario Inc.
The corporation was voluntarily dissolved on July 26, 2023 under the Business Corporations Act.
Section 1 declares the company revived and restores all property, rights, privileges, franchises, liabilities, contracts, disabilities and debts as of the date of dissolution.
The Act preserves any rights that a person acquired after the corporation’s dissolution—those third‑party rights are not disturbed by the revival.
The statute comes into force on the day it receives Royal Assent and is cited as the 1976998 Ontario Inc. Act, 2025.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Application and factual background
The Preamble records that Bijun Gong and Zhenyu Gong were directors and shareholders at the time of voluntary dissolution and that they asked the Legislature to revive the corporation. This matters because private Acts in Ontario commonly follow a showing that applicants had an interest in the dissolved company; the Preamble frames the legislative authority and the narrow remedial purpose of this statute.
Revival: restoration to pre-dissolution legal position
Section 1 does the heavy lifting: it restores the corporation to the legal position it occupied at the moment of dissolution. The text is broad—it expressly includes property, rights, privileges, franchises and also liabilities, contracts and debts. Practically, this means existing causes of action and obligations that belonged to the corporation at dissolution may be enforced again, subject to the carve-out for subsequent third‑party rights.
Protection for rights acquired after dissolution
Also in Section 1, the Legislature preserves ‘any rights acquired by any person after its dissolution.’ That carve‑out protects purchasers, assignees, lien‑holders or other transferees who obtained rights during the period of dissolution and prevents revival from automatically undoing their transactions—although real‑world disputes can arise about the scope and timing of those acquisitions.
Commencement — immediate effect on Royal Assent
Section 2 makes the Act effective the day it receives Royal Assent. For practitioners that simplicity is useful: there is no delayed effective date to coordinate with administrative filings. It does mean, however, that any revival consequences (including potential revived claims) take effect immediately and can affect ongoing litigation, registration and enforcement actions.
Short title
Section 3 provides the statutory short title: the 1976998 Ontario Inc. Act, 2025. Short titles in private Acts are mostly administrative but they matter for citation, registry updates and any drafting of subsequent documents that refer to the revival.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- The applicants/former directors and shareholders (Bijun Gong and Zhenyu Gong): revival lets them re‑use the corporate name, resume business operations under the original entity and reclaim title or contractual rights that existed at dissolution.
- Creditors and claimants who held claims against the company at dissolution: they can pursue pre‑existing debts and liabilities that would otherwise have been extinguished by dissolution.
- Contract counterparties and licensors with ongoing relationships: the Act can restore contractual continuity and clarify the entity responsible for performance, which simplifies contract enforcement and regulatory compliance.
- The corporation itself (as a legal person): revival preserves corporate identity, enabling it to hold property, bring or defend legal actions, and apply for administrative reinstatements or licences under its original registration.
Who Bears the Cost
- Parties who engaged with the company during the dissolution period but did not properly document transactions: they may face revived claims or competing priorities and will bear the cost of litigation or title disputes.
- Former and potential creditors of the corporation: revival may increase the pool of assets recoverable by creditors, but it can also revive old claims that lead to additional enforcement costs and diminished recoveries for some creditors depending on priority.
- Administrative bodies and registries (e.g., Companies Registry, land titles offices): these offices may need to process filings, correct records, and handle conflicting registrations without the Act prescribing specific administrative steps.
- The revived corporation's officers and directors: they may inherit legacy liabilities, compliance gaps or tax obligations that require negotiation, settlement or litigation to resolve.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances correcting an administratively created extinguishment (restoring legal continuity for original stakeholders and creditors) against protecting the finality of transactions made in the interim; resolving that balance forces a trade‑off between undoing an extinction that may be unfair to original owners and preserving the reasonable expectations of third parties who relied on the company’s dissolution.
The Act is concise and narrowly focused, which creates implementation questions that it does not address. It revives the corporation and restores rights and liabilities as of dissolution, but it does not specify how revival interacts with limitation periods, ongoing litigation, tax assessments, or regulatory licences that may have lapsed or been reissued during the intervening period.
Practically, enforcement of revived claims may run into statutes of limitation or laches, and courts will likely be asked to decide whether revival alone re‑starts limitation periods or simply preserves the pre‑existing cause of action.
The statute’s protection for rights acquired after dissolution shields third‑party transactions, but it leaves open thorny factual questions about when a right was ‘acquired’ and the relative priority of competing claims (for example, if an asset was sold and later reclaimed by a creditor). The Act also does not prescribe procedural steps such as mandatory notice to known creditors, requirements to restore corporate filings or how registries should treat revived ownership—those operational details will fall to administrative practices, the courts, or separate filings under the Business Corporations Act.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.