Grant Thornton Limited, the monitor of Able Infrastructure Inc. and Precision Concrete Services Limited, has taken the sale of the two companies' equipment to court itself. Its notice of motion of November 5 asks the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia to approve the sale to related entities and vest the equipment in the purchaser, to approve the distribution of funds set out in its Eighth Report, and to terminate the CCAA proceedings and discharge the monitor upon the filing of its termination certificate, per the Notice of Motion, Nov. 5, 2026, p. 1. The buyers are Able Bridge Construction Inc. and Highrise Precision Concrete Inc., the price is $500,000 paid in instalments, and the order sought would, upon confirmation that the sale has closed, let the monitor distribute "all estate funds to CRA in respect of its deemed trust claim" under s. 227 of the Income Tax Act, as the report puts it, per the Eighth Report, Nov. 5, 2026, paras. 12(b), 24. Approval of the sale "would typically be sought by the Companies," a footnote to the monitor's brief observes; the monitor is "advancing all grounds of relief in this motion with the approval of this Honourable Court and the agreement of the relevant stakeholders," per the Monitor's Brief, Nov. 5, 2026, para. 11(b), n. 1.
Able's schedule of assets lists three tower cranes: a 1999 Terex Peiner hammerhead with 70 metres of jib, a 1991 hammerhead with 40 metres, and a 2001 Terex-Peiner SK315. Then come about 1,254 pieces of Peri wall formwork and bridge overhang brackets by the hundred. Precision's lists two Somero laser screeds, dozens of power trowels, a 2015 Bobcat mini excavator and a fleet of pickups, vans and trailers, per the Eighth Report, App. A and App. B, Sch. 1.1(a).
As reported here on September 29, the monitor said in September that it would support no extension beyond the one it then backed "unless the Equipment Transaction is finalized and an application is made to the Court for its approval," per the Seventh Report, Sept. 28, 2026, para. 48. In July it had understood the deal as $700,000 cash at closing, financed by a third-party lender, per the Sixth Report, July 10, 2026, paras. 24–25. The court then extended the stay on October 1, to November 9, the day this motion is set down, per the Eighth Report, para. 10. Able was also among the files in Reversing the Crown's GST/HST trust, published here on September 24.
Why the lenders said no, as the buyers tell it
On October 2, the report says, the purchasers outlined their efforts with various lenders and told the monitor those efforts "had fallen short." The market value of the equipment, appraised at the outset of the proceedings, "has deteriorated because of market conditions in major Canadian cities," they said, with "a 'glut' on the market for this type of equipment," so that lenders "significantly discounted the value of the appraisals." The purchasers, by their own account, were established in the last eighteen months, have minimal credit history and are related parties to the companies, and lenders had concerns about their creditworthiness. Lenders therefore required, they said, personal guarantees and outside security from the principal shareholders and directors; the purchasers' explanation is that those guarantees "were not of substantive merit given the potential directors liability arising from the Companies' indebtedness to CRA," and that the third-party security or guarantees various lenders requested "was not obtainable," per the Eighth Report, para. 25.
In that context the purchasers put forward the present deal as "the highest or otherwise best offer available in the circumstances," one that would let them continue as going concerns and give the CRA a recovery "better than any available alternative." Because the companies and the purchasers are controlled by the same two individuals, the report says, the companies support it, per the Eighth Report, paras. 26–27.
A last instalment from the buyers' holdbacks
There are two agreements, Able's equipment to Able Bridge and Precision's to Highrise, and each sets the price at $250,000 plus HST, payable in three instalments: $37,500 on November 30, 2026, $37,500 on December 30, and $175,000 on January 31, 2027, that last one "based on release and payment of holdbacks on projects completed by the Purchaser." No releases are contemplated. The settlement agreement with the CRA requires the $500,000 to be paid to the monitor on or before February 28, 2027, per the Eighth Report, para. 24; App. A and App. B, ss. 3.1–3.2; App. C, s. 2(a).
The monitor reviewed a monthly cash-flow forecast for the buyers, prepared, it understands, with the companies' financial advisor. Because the purchasers are not applicants, it says, it "did not engage in a deep review," citing s. 23(1)(b) of the CCAA, though it completed inquiries, analytical procedures and discussions; on that basis the forecast "indicates they can complete the proposed Equipment Transaction and comply with all monetary obligations required in the CRA Agreement." For the January instalment, the monitor is advised that the purchasers will complete two contracts in November and December, with the holdbacks anticipated in January. "While the Monitor does not anticipate the same issues as arose with the Companies' holdbacks held by Marco," the report says, the timing of holdback releases can vary, so the outside date to close was moved to the end of February 2027, per the Eighth Report, para. 28(a)–(b).
A bankruptcy as the benchmark
The monitor "acknowledges that no public process was run to solicit bids for the Companies' equipment, and therefore the Court has no competing offers against which to assess the Equipment Transaction." In the monitor's view, the benchmark is "the net recovery likely to be achieved if CRA enforces against the Companies and the equipment is liquidated in a bankruptcy," per the Eighth Report, para. 37. Its brief says no public sales process was conducted "in part due to the uncertainty of the assets' market value, and the costs associated with such a sales process that could not guarantee a higher recovery to creditors," per the Monitor's Brief, para. 24.
Most of the equipment, the monitor was told, sits on active construction sites across the Halifax Regional Municipality. Working from two third-party invoices for a recent crane demobilization, totalling approximately $64,000, and the companies' own labour, it estimates $50,000 to $80,000 a crane, or $150,000 to $240,000 for Able's three, plus two to three days each of trucking and labour to gather the rest, for $200,000 to $320,000 of direct demobilization and transfer costs "before professional fees, insurance, rent, commissions and any breach-of-contract claims from active job sites," per the Eighth Report, para. 28(c).
On value, the monitor understands the equipment to be older, highly used and in "fair" rather than "good" shape, and it has not personally inspected it. The comparable equipment it found for sale was, it says, in much better condition or much newer, and it "was unable to independently validate the current market value of the Companies' equipment." It treats the opinion of Jardine, an Atlantic Canada auctioneer, "as regards market risk" as "an important determinant in overall value." Jardine's appraisal said the cranes and concrete forms "are very industry specific with a very small window of prospective buyers creating a high level of risk," and that "There are past auction sale examples of Cranes selling for 20% of their [orderly liquidation value]," which Jardine put down to "supply, demand and cost to relocate," per the Eighth Report, paras. 32–34.
Keep reading with a 5-day free trial
About 5 more minutes of this analysis, and 3 more sections. Every fact in it cites the filing it was read from.
Card required. Nothing charged for 5 days. Cancel anytime.
Already a subscriber? Sign in.
See all plans