I will add that even if I am wrong in reaching this conclusion, it is not disputed that a second proof of claim was sent to the substituted trustee in bankruptcy approximately 11 months after the date of bankruptcy. I find that the decision of Moriyama v. The Queen, cited above, is authority for the proposition that this was a valid proof of claim and that the requirements of paragraph 227.1(2)(c) were met, again given the directory nature of that provision.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.