The case involves Patricia Grand’Lair (Appellant) and Etienne Deblois (Respondent), who are divorced and co-directors of DGCL Consultation, a company in liquidation. The appellant brought a derivative action against the respondent, alleging unscrupulous dealings in the sale of a condo owned by DGCL. The court ordered the company to be wound up and a liquidator to be appointed, striking out the appellant’s claim and awarding costs to the respondent. The appellant sought to overturn these costs orders, alleging fraud and dishonesty by the respondent.
The appeal was dismissed, and the costs of the appeal were awarded to the respondent.
The court found that:
1. The learned judge was correct in dismissing the application to set aside the costs orders on the grounds that the court was functus officio.
2. The appellant failed to prove that the costs orders were tainted by fraud or dishonesty.
3. The allegations of fraud were not known to the Chief Justice when the orders were made, and the findings of the liquidator did not constitute a material change in circumstances that would warrant setting aside the costs orders.
4. The costs orders were not obtained by fraud, and the appellant did not meet the burden of proof required to overturn the orders.