This short Act revives 861282 Ontario Limited and restores the corporation to the legal position it held on the date it was voluntarily dissolved (June 25, 2024). The revival includes property, rights and franchises and also re-imposes liabilities, contracts and debts, but expressly preserves any rights acquired by other persons after the dissolution.
The Sponsor explains the revival is to allow the estate trustee of the sole shareholder to deal with property that remained in the corporation’s name. Practically, the Act backdates corporate existence to enable transactions or claims that would have existed on the dissolution date, while insulating bona fide third‑party acquisitions that occurred in the interim.
At a Glance
What It Does
The Act restores the dissolved corporation to the legal position it had immediately before dissolution — including assets, liabilities, contracts and franchises — but it protects rights that third parties acquired after the dissolution. It takes effect on Royal Assent.
Who It Affects
Directly affects the estate trustee (the applicant and former director/officer), potential claimants against the corporation, persons who acquired corporate property after the dissolution, and registries that record corporate and land interests.
Why It Matters
Special‑interest revival statutes are the legislature’s tool for fixing transactions that cannot be undone administratively; this one resolves competing claims over property and re‑enables estate administration while raising questions about how post‑dissolution third‑party interests and registrations will be treated.
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 focused, retrospective revival: it declares that 861282 Ontario Limited is restored to the legal status it held on the date it was dissolved, as if the dissolution never occurred. That restoration is broad — it covers property, rights, privileges and franchises — and it also revives obligations the corporation had on that date, such as contracts and debts.
The practical effect is to put the company back into existence so the estate trustee can complete transactions or enable enforcement actions tied to the corporation’s pre‑dissolution state.
The Act limits the retroactive effect by safeguarding “any rights acquired by any person after its dissolution.” That carve‑out preserves the legal positions of third parties who in the interim relied on the corporation’s absence — for example, someone who purchased property or obtained an interest from what they reasonably understood to be an owner in the period between dissolution and revival. The bill does not define what counts as a protected post‑dissolution right, so courts and registries will likely be asked to resolve close cases.Because the Act takes effect on Royal Assent, it imposes no retroactive procedural steps on registries other than those necessary to reflect the corporation’s restored status, but it creates operational work for the estate trustee: reinstating corporate records, notifying creditors, reactivating tax and regulatory accounts, and, where appropriate, seeking court or registry orders to clear title or remove registrations made during the dissolution interval.
The revival also exposes the corporation and its estate trustee to liabilities and contractual obligations that existed on June 25, 2024, meaning creditors may have enforceable claims that previously could not be pursued against a dissolved entity.Finally, this is an instance of ad hoc legislative relief: rather than using administrative revival procedures found in corporate statutes, the applicant sought and the legislature grants a private Act tailored to a single corporation. That approach is efficient for resolving discrete estate problems but leaves unanswered questions about transparency, uniformity, and the treatment of competing post‑dissolution interests in property and registries.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The corporation was voluntarily dissolved on June 25, 2024; the Act restores its legal status as of that date.
The applicant is Tracy M. Schembri (formerly Butler), a former director/officer and the estate trustee for the sole shareholder’s estate.
The Act explicitly restores both assets and liabilities — property, rights and franchises are reinstated alongside contracts, debts and disabilities that existed at dissolution.
The revival is subject to “any rights acquired by any person after its dissolution,” preserving intervening third‑party acquisitions.
The Act comes into force on the day it receives Royal Assent and is cited as the 861282 Ontario Limited Act, 2026.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Applicant and purpose identified
The Preamble records that an estate trustee and former corporate officer applied for special legislation to revive the company so estate matters and property can be resolved. Practically, the Preamble signals the remedial purpose: this is private relief tailored to a single corporation rather than a general change to corporate law.
Revival and retrospective restoration
This is the operative clause: it restores the corporation to the legal position it held on the dissolution date. That language is broad — it reaches titles, contractual rights, liabilities and statutory privileges. The clause both enables asset recovery and reactivates obligations, meaning creditors and contractual counterparties regain enforceable claims that existed before dissolution. The restoration is framed as subject to rights acquired by others after dissolution, which creates a boundary for retroactivity.
Commencement and short title
Section 2 fixes commencement: the Act takes effect on Royal Assent, which determines when registries and parties must treat the corporation as restored. Section 3 supplies the short title for citation. These provisions complete the Act and mark the moment from which the restored status operates administratively.
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 estate trustee (Tracy M. Schembri): Gains statutory authority to act through the revived corporation so she can transfer, sell or otherwise deal with property that remained in the company’s name.
- Estate beneficiaries of Rosalyn Butler: Benefit indirectly because the revival enables asset realization and distribution that the estate could not accomplish while the corporation remained dissolved.
- Unpaid creditors with pre‑dissolution claims: Obtain a vehicle (the revived corporation) through which to assert and collect debts that existed at the time of dissolution.
Who Bears the Cost
- Persons who acquired interests in corporate property after dissolution: Face legal uncertainty and possible loss of an acquired interest if courts find the acquisition wasn’t protected under the Act’s carve‑out.
- The estate trustee and estate itself: Will incur administrative, legal and potentially tax costs to reinstate corporate records, defend or litigate competing claims, and satisfy revived liabilities.
- Registries and government offices (land titles, corporate registry, tax authorities): Must update records and may be pulled into disputes about the priority and validity of entries recorded during the dissolution interval.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill resolves one clear problem — restoring corporate existence so an estate can deal with property — but it does so at the cost of unsettling parties who relied on the corporation’s dissolution; the central tension is between enabling retrospective relief for an estate and protecting the reliance interests of third parties who acted during the corporation’s absence.
The Act leaves several practical and legal questions unresolved. It does not define what constitutes rights “acquired by any person after its dissolution,” so the critical line between protected third‑party acquisitions and interests subject to reversal is unclear.
That ambiguity invites litigation over whether bona fide purchasers, transferees recorded in land registries, or assignees of corporate property in intermediary transactions are insulated from the revival’s retroactive effect.
The bill also does not address procedural mechanics: it says the corporation is restored as of the dissolution date but does not set timelines or processes for correcting public records, reissuing certificates, or addressing tax and compliance lapses accrued during the inactive period. Those operational gaps can force estate trustees into multiple forums — registry offices, tax authorities and courts — to clear title or reestablish accounts.
Finally, by reinstating liabilities and contracts without qualification, the Act can expose estates and former directors to revived claims that may exceed the estate’s ability to pay, and it raises questions about whether limitation periods are tolled or restarted by revival.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.