Canada: Royalty Holders Are Invested In The Land: Court In Dianor Resources Concludes Royalties Are An Interest In Land Not To Be Vested Out

Last Updated: July 25 2019
Article by Daphne J. MacKenzie and Kelly Niebergall

In a pair of decisions1, the Ontario Court of Appeal considered (i) whether  a gross overriding royalty (GOR) is an interest in land and (ii) whether an interest in land can be extinguished by a vesting order (and, if so, when). Deliberately recognizing the commercial realities of financing an oil and gas or mining operation, and the expectations of the parties, the court's analysis suggests that typically (i) a GOR will be an interest in land and (ii) subject to an agreement to subordinate that interest to secured creditors of the mining claim holder or the consent of the GOR holder to the vesting order, it will not be appropriate to vest out a GOR.

Third Eye Capital made loans to Dianor Resources, which became insolvent. Third Eye requested that the court appoint a receiver over Dianor's assets pursuant to s. 243 of the BIA. The receiver ran a sales process, which generated two bids for Dianor's assets, which largely consisted of a group of mining claims. Both bids required that the royalty interests (in favour of Essar Steel Algoma) and the gross overriding royalties (in favour of a group of companies related to the seller of the mining claims to Dianor) in the mining claims be extinguished. Third Eye was the successful bidder with a bid that included a credit bid of some of its debt as well as cash payable to the holders of the royalty and GORs intended to represent fair market value for the holders' interests. The holder of the GORs did not oppose the sale but asked that the mining claims be transferred subject to the GORs. The judge approved the sale and granted a vesting order that transferred the mining claims and vested out the royalty and GORs. The GOR holder did not immediately appeal.

After the applicable appeal period, the holder of the GORs applied to the court to set aside the sale and to obtain an order that the GORs constitute an interest in land, presumably with the expectation that, as such, they could not be vested out.

The terms of the GORs provided that that the holders retained a 20% GOR for diamonds and a 1.5% GOR for all other metals and minerals, and expressly provided that the GORs were intended to constitute an interest in land running with the property. Notices of the GORs were registered on title to the relevant lands pursuant to the Land Titles Act (Ontario) and the mining claims pursuant to the Mining Act (Ontario).

The court of first instance held that the GORs were not an interest in land and that therefore the court had jurisdiction to vest them out. The court suggested that it might have jurisdiction to vest out the interests regardless of whether they constitute interests in land. The GOR holder appealed.

First Court of Appeal Decision: GORs can be an interest in land notwithstanding the GOR holder has no right to enter on the property or extract minerals

On appeal to the Court of Appeal, that court overturned the lower court's decision, finding that the GORs were interests in land.

The Court of Appeal canvassed the common law prior to the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in Dynex,2 which was to the effect that an interest in land could not arise from an incorporeal hereditament such as a working interest, and then described the Supreme Court's deliberate change of the common law in response to commercial realities of financing oil and gas operations: "Providing lenders with real property interests protects them in the event of an insolvency and leads to better financing terms for borrowers."3 (This may have been a harbinger of the court's determination on the issue of whether the court could vest out interests in land.)

The Court of Appeal described how, in Dynex, the Supreme Court held that "a royalty which is an interest in land may be created from an incorporeal hereditament such as a working interest or a profit à prendre, if that is the intention of the parties."4 That is, a royalty may be an interest in land "if (1) the language used in describing the interest indicates that the parties intended the interest to be an interest in land and not just a contractual right to a portion of the oil and gas substances recovered from the land, and (2) the interest out of which the royalty is carved is itself an interest in land."5

The Dianor court of first instance had held that the express statement in the GOR documents that the GORs were intended to constitute an interest in land and the registration of the GORs on title to the land and mining claims were insufficient to create an interest in land. The GOR holder had no right to enter on the property to explore and extract minerals, but only to receive a percentage of the value of the minerals: as such, the GOR was not an interest in land.

The Court of Appeal applied the test in Dynex to different effect, overturning the lower court's decision. The Court of Appeal first noted that Dianor's interests were working interests or profits à prendre, and therefore the second element of the Dynex test was satisfied. The Court of Appeal cited with approval the Court of Appeal decision in Dynex to the effect that "the court must 'examine the parties' intentions from the agreement as a whole, along with the surrounding circumstances"6 and found that the plain language of the agreements creating the GORs and the fact that the GOR holder registered the GORs against the lands and mining claims evidenced the parties' intentions to create an interest in land.

The Court of Appeal in Dianor took the opportunity to clarify the Dynex test, noting that a royalty right does not have to have the incidents of a working interest (such as the right to enter on to property and to extract minerals) in order to constitute an interest in land and that the fact that the GORs are calculated on production need not defeat the clear intention of the parties to constitute the GORs as interests in land.

The Court of Appeal distinguished the decision of the Court of Appeal of Quebec in Anglo Pacific,7 a decision which was based entirely on the civil law rather than the common law of Dynex, stating that Dynex represents the law in Ontario.8

Given the court's finding that the GOR's interests were interests in land, the court requested submissions from the parties with respect to whether the court had jurisdiction to vest out such interests in a receivership scenario.

Second Decision: Certain interests in land may be vested out by a vesting order

The same 3-judge panel heard the submissions on whether an interest in land can be vested out by order of the court. After an extensive canvassing of the legislative history and statutory purpose of vesting orders in Canada, the court concluded that a court has jurisdiction pursuant to s. 243 of the Bankuptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) to approve a sale proposed by a receiver and to grant a vesting order which both conveys title and extinguishes encumbrances on title to facilitate the sale.

The court then considered whether the motion judge, having jurisdiction to grant the vesting order, exercised such jurisdiction inappropriately in vesting out the GORs from title. The court stated that:

"in considering whether an interest in land should be extinguished, a court should consider (1) the nature of the interest in land; and (2) whether the interest holder has consented to the vesting out of the interest either in the insolvency process itself or in agreements reached prior to the insolvency.

If these factors prove to be ambiguous or inconclusive, the court may then engage in a consideration of the equities to determine if a vesting order is appropriate in the particular circumstances of the case. This would include: consideration of the prejudice, if any, to the third party interest holder; whether the third party may be adequately compensated for its interest from the proceeds of the disposition or sale; whether, based on evidence of value, there is any equity in the property; and whether the parties are acting in good faith. This is not an exhaustive list and there may be other factors that are relevant to the analysis."9

At the first stage of the test, "the court should assess the nature and strength of the interest that is proposed to be extinguished. The answer to this question may be determinative thus obviating the need to consider other factors." The court went on to comment that a fee simple interest, as a rule, should not be vested out and also noted that an easement in active use "may also defy extinguishment".10

In considering the nature and strength of the interest:

 "a key inquiry is whether the interest in land is more akin to a fixed monetary interest that is attached to real or personal property subject to the sale (such as a mortgage or a lien for municipal taxes), or whether the interest is more akin to a fee simple that is in substance an ownership interest in some ascertainable feature of the property itself. This latter type of interest is tied to the inherent characteristics of the property itself; it is not a fixed sum of money that is extinguished when the monetary obligation is fulfilled. Put differently, the reasonable expectation of the owner of such an interest is that its interest is of a continuing nature and, absent consent, cannot be involuntarily extinguished in the ordinary course through a payment in lieu."11

On the facts of the case, the Court of Appeal held that the GORs, while not fee simple interests, "did not exist simply to secure a fixed finite monetary obligation; rather they were in substance an interest in a continuing and an inherent feature of the property itself".12 The court held that "the interest represented by the GOR is an ownership in the product of the mining claim, either payable by a share of the physical product or a share of revenues. In other words, the GOR carves out an overriding entitlement to an amount of the property interest held by the owner of the mining claims."13 Presumably, this analysis would be applicable to GORs generally unless, perhaps, the GOR secured repayment of a monetary obligation.

At the second stage of the test, consent of the third party to the vesting order would obviously be a clear indicator, but an agreement of the interest holder to subordinate its interest to a secured creditor may also be indicative of an agreement to permit the interest to be vested out.14 On the facts of the case at issue, the court held that no such agreement to be vested out existed. As a result, the motion judge had erred in permitting the GORs to be vested out. (The court found that no consideration of the equities was required as the factors were neither ambiguous nor inconclusive.)

However, given the conduct of the GOR holder, including its failure to file its appeal in a timely manner, the Court of Appeal refused to grant the requested order to set aside the sale. The limitation period for the appeal was 10 days from the motion judge's decision to approve the sale, pursuant to the BIA rules. On that point, the court noted that "absent some emergency that has been highlighted in its Receiver's report to the court that supports its request for a vesting order, a Receiver should await the expiry of the 10 day appeal period before closing the sale transaction to which the vesting order relates."15 There is a suggestion that, even then, if the Receiver is aware that an appeal is under consideration, it may be appropriate not to preclude such appeal by closing the transaction. However, on the facts at issue,16 the Receiver was entitled to close the transaction and transfer the mining claims.

Royalty holders will be comforted by this pair of decisions of the Court of Appeal, which recognize and give effect to the intentions of the parties in granting and accepting royalty interests and the need for such intentions to carry the day when the property at issue is the subject of a vesting order.


1Third Eye Capital Corporation v. Ressources Dianor Inc./Dianor Resources Inc., 2018 ONCA 253 (First decision) and Third Eye Capital Corporation v. Ressources Dianor Inc./Dianor Resources Inc., 2019 ONCA 508 (Second decision).

2 Bank of Montreal v. Dynex Petroleum Ltd., 2002 SCC 7.

3 First decision at para 41.

4 First decision at para 50.

5 First decision at para 51.

6 First decision at para 63.

7Anglo Pacific Group PLC c. Ernst & Young Inc., 2013 QCCA 1323.

8 The court also took the opportunity to note that the issue in the appeal in St. Andrew Goldfields Ltd. v. Newmont Canada Ltd., 2009 O.J. No. 3266, aff'd 2011 ONCA 377 was not whether the royalty agreement created an interest in land but the interpretation of the relevant documents and the effect of the failure to obtain consent to the sale of the mine: as such, the court concluded the decision was not applicable to the issues in front of it.

9 Second decision at paras 109, 110.

10 Second decision at paras 103. 104.

11 Second decision at para 105.

12 Second decision at para 111.

13 Second decision at para 113.

14 Second decision at paras 106, 107.

15 Second decision at para 139.

16 See Second decision at paras 134, 135.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions