The moving party, a shareholder and creditor in CCAA proceedings, sought to vary a prior order requiring him to post security for costs before proceeding with a motion.
He argued that new facts had arisen regarding a promissory note issued during the proceedings.
The court dismissed the motion, finding that the evidence relied upon was either available at the time of the original hearing or could have been discovered with reasonable diligence, and would not have probably affected the result.
The court also declined to exercise its discretionary authority under section 11 of the CCAA, noting that reopening a final order would encourage litigation by installment.
