I'm sure he was. That was the operative process for liquidating the company and distributing the proceeds to the claimants in order of seniority. I'm not sure it would occur to him to make a distinction between in the CCAA and outside of it, and I am sure, completely sure, that he would find the idea that he or his client used that distinction in order to actively deceive some investors while dropping a hint to more astute investors, to be insulting and embarrassing.
It appears that he is nearly begging NOT to be contacted about the result, or more importantly what wasn't the result, any more.
