Summary#
The MFIS Holdings and Investments Inc. Act, 2025 is a special Ontario Act that revives an existing corporation; it does not amend another Act. Its stated goal is to let the corporation deal with real property that was registered in its name when it was dissolved. The supplied text is marked as having received Royal Assent, and says the Act starts on Royal Assent.
- MFIS Holdings and Investments Inc. is restored to its legal position as of its dissolution on February 11, 2020, as if it had not been dissolved.
- The restoration includes the corporation’s property, rights, privileges and franchises, but is subject to rights anyone acquired after dissolution.
- The corporation is also restored subject to its liabilities, contracts, disabilities and debts as of dissolution.
What it means for you#
- The corporation and its applicant: The corporation is revived. The preamble says its former sole director and president applied so it could deal with real property. The Act does not set out steps for dealing with that property.
- People who acquired rights after dissolution: The revival is subject to those rights. The Act does not say how a conflict between those rights and the corporation’s restored rights would be resolved.
- Creditors and people with contracts involving the corporation: The corporation is restored subject to its liabilities, debts and contracts as of dissolution. The Act does not cancel them.
- General public: The Act revives this named corporation. It does not create a general revival program, new public service, tax, fee or fine.
Money#
No publicly available information on the Act’s public cost or any private costs.
- The Act does not specify spending, staffing, fees or compensation.
What is unclear#
- The Act does not identify the real property or explain what steps the corporation must take to deal with it.
- It does not explain how disputes involving rights acquired after dissolution would be handled.
- The supplied text gives no date for Royal Assent, so the Act’s start date cannot be confirmed from these materials.
- No publicly available information on the corporation’s current assets, debts or contracts.
Case for#
- A possible argument for the Act is that reviving the corporation gives it legal capacity to deal with property that was registered in its name.
- Restoring the corporation’s legal position, including its debts and contracts, may provide continuity rather than treating the corporation as if it had no prior legal history.
- The Act preserves rights acquired by others after dissolution, limiting the revival’s effect on those rights.
Case against#
- The Act restores the corporation broadly, including its property and legal rights, without identifying the property or explaining how affected people would be notified.
- It is unclear how the Act’s restoration of the corporation’s rights interacts with rights acquired after dissolution.
- The Act restores the corporation subject to its debts and other liabilities, but the supplied material does not describe their extent.