Ms. Claudette Rondeau at the Justice and Human Rights Committee

I have an answer all written out for that one.

The word “insuffisant” is not logical in this context and should be replaced with “suffisant”. When you read the provision, it seems clear that the provision is addressing two scenarios: a first scenario in which the assets are not sufficient to pay all the claimants and a second scenario in which the assets are sufficient to pay all the claimants. The error arises in the French version when it describes the second scenario as “à moins que l'actif ne soit insuffisant pourdésintéresser intégralement tous les réclamants”.

In English, this would correspond to, “unless the assets are not sufficient to pay all claimants”, which is the exact opposite of what is intended.

Then the words “alors que” are incorrect and should be replaced with “auquel cas” because “alors que” does not create a link to the situation that we previously described, whereas “auquel cas” does.