3 6 ( 1 ) ▁of ▁the ▁Act ; ▁while ▁provincial ▁legisl ation ▁may ▁valid ly ▁affect ▁prior ities ▁in ▁a ▁non - bank rupt cy ▁situation , ▁once ▁bank rupt cy ▁has ▁occurred ▁section ▁ 1 3 6 ( 1 ) ▁of ▁the ▁Act ▁determ ines ▁the ▁status ▁and ▁priority ▁of ▁the ▁claims ▁specifically ▁de alt ▁with ▁in ▁that ▁section ; ▁if ▁the ▁provinces ▁could ▁create ▁their ▁own ▁prior ities ▁or ▁affect ▁prior ities ▁under ▁the ▁Bank rupt cy ▁Act ▁this ▁would ▁inv ite ▁a ▁different ▁scheme ▁of ▁distribution ▁on ▁bank rupt cy ▁from ▁province ▁to ▁province , ▁an ▁un accept able ▁situation ; ▁and ▁the ▁definition ▁of ▁terms ▁such ▁as ▁" sec ured ▁cred itor ", ▁if ▁defined ▁under ▁the ▁Bank rupt cy ▁Act , ▁must ▁be ▁interpreted ▁in ▁bank rupt cy ▁cases ▁as ▁defined ▁by ▁the ▁federal ▁Parliament , ▁not ▁the ▁provincial ▁legisl atures . ▁Provin ces ▁cannot ▁affect ▁how ▁such ▁terms ▁are ▁defined ▁for ▁purposes ▁of ▁the ▁Act . ▁in ▁determ ining ▁the ▁relationship ▁between ▁provincial ▁legisl ation ▁and ▁the ▁Bank rupt cy ▁Act , ▁the ▁form ▁of ▁the ▁provincial ▁interest ▁created ▁must ▁not ▁be ▁allowed ▁to ▁triumph ▁over ▁its ▁subst ance . ▁The ▁provinces ▁are ▁not ▁entitled ▁to ▁do ▁indirect ly ▁what ▁they ▁are ▁prohib ited ▁from ▁doing ▁directly . ▁there ▁need ▁not ▁be ▁any ▁provincial ▁intention ▁to ▁intr ude ▁into ▁the ▁exclusive ▁federal ▁sphere ▁of ▁bank rupt cy ▁and ▁to ▁conflict ▁with ▁the ▁order ▁of ▁prior ities ▁of ▁the ▁Bank rupt cy ▁Act ▁in ▁order ▁to ▁render