The defendants brought a motion for partial summary judgment seeking dismissal of portions of an oppression remedy claim on the basis that certain alleged acts were statute‑barred.
The claim arose from a long‑running business dispute in which the plaintiff alleged that the individual defendant conducted the affairs of several corporations in a manner oppressive or unfairly prejudicial to the plaintiff’s interests.
The court held that the alleged acts formed part of a complex factual matrix concerning the parties’ ongoing business relationship and that determining when the limitation period began to run required detailed factual findings.
Because a full appreciation of the evidence could not be achieved on the motion record, summary judgment was inappropriate.
The motion was dismissed and the issues were left for determination at trial.
