Richard I. Good

The court considered a request from Hudson's Bay Company (HBC) to reconsider a previous costs order, seeking $36,711.83 in costs payable forthwith, arguing that despite divided success on earlier motions, it was entirely successful in having the plaintiff's action struck as statute-barred.

Nygård International Partnership (Nygård) opposed, arguing the court was functus officio and that the original "costs in the cause" order was appropriate.

The court found it was not functus officio but maintained its original discretion, affirming that "costs in the cause" was fair and appropriate given the intertwined motions and divided success, allowing the trial judge to determine costs based on the whole proceedings.

The plaintiff, Nygård, moved to amend its Statement of Claim, and the defendant, HBC, brought a cross-motion for summary judgment dismissing the action as statute-barred.

The dispute arose from consignment agreements where HBC allegedly applied unauthorized markdowns to the selling price.

The court found that Nygård discovered the initial setoffs in 2012, making those claims statute-barred.

However, the ongoing deductions constituted periodic breaches of contract.

The court held that claims arising before February 2, 2016 (two years prior to the motion to amend) were statute-barred, while claims arising after that date could proceed.