Hudson’s Bay’s bid to complete the sale of 25 leases to British Columbia-based billionaire Ruby Liu for about $69 million remained uncertain Friday after an Ontario judge decided to reserve his decision following two days of court hearings.

Justice Peter Osborne of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, listened to various parties on Thursday and Friday including lawyers representing Liu, HBC and several landowners against the sale of the leases to the Vancouver-based billionaire.

“Needless to say, I’m going to reserve my decision,” Osborne said. “You have given me a few things to think about.”

HBC, Canada’s oldest retailer, which filed for bankruptcy protection under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act in March, is trying to pay back millions of dollars to its creditors. Aside from monetizing its leases, HBC also fired all its employees, sold intellectual property rights to Canadian Tire Corp. Ltd. and is trying to auction off its artifacts. Each of those steps needs to be approved by an Ontario court.

An approval of the sale of the 25 leases to Liu would lead to a recovery of over $50 million for HBC’s creditors and create about 1,800 jobs across Canada, according to a court document filed by HBC. But a number of landlords, including Ivanhoe Cambridge and Cadillac Fairview Corp, Ltd, have been contesting Liu’s claims.

At the hearing on Friday, Matthew Gottlieb, a lawyer speaking on behalf of all the landlords said that Liu’s business plan “cannot be relied on.” He also said that Liu didn’t have $400 million or “anywhere close to $400 million” that she has committed to spend on rebuilding the stores.

Even if the $400 million were available, it wouldn’t be sufficient to fund the plan, he said. “Nordstrom, Walmart spent billions. So, although 400 million sounds like a lot of money, and it is, it is not a lot of money for a redevelopment, rebuild of 28 stores in three provinces.”

He said that the plan was “doomed to fail.” “If the assignment is granted, it will lead to a second insolvency in an anchor tenant space with no ability to collect on the damages and the harm they’ll suffer.”

Another lawyer representing the landlords told the court that it was far less damaging to landlords and other tenants in a shopping mall to have a vacant space than to have an “unsuitable, inappropriate anchor tenant.”

Friday’s arguments came a day after Maria Konyukhova, a lawyer representing Hudson’s Bay, referred to the landlords’ objections as “exaggerated” and “misguided” but “entirely logical once we understand and take into account the value these landlords stand to gain if” Liu fails.

The lawyer said that the landlords’ objections were based on an “absurdly high standard” and that if they were adopted by the court, it could lead to an unreasonable precedent for future cases with the “balance in the negotiations” potentially getting lost.

In a previous court filing, Liu, the proposed purchaser, said the landlords’ concerns were misguided.

“I have no intention to invest $400 million into a business and then have it fail after such a significant expenditure,” she said in a court filing. “I am committed to the financial success of the business.”

She said she is prepared to guarantee rent obligations under the leases for a period of one year after getting the leases to “provide comfort” to the landlords.

Previously Liu had said that the new stores would dedicate about 30,000 square feet for a kids’ play area and that the “flagship” stores are also likely to have Asian supermarkets and an Asian fusion dining area.

She also plans to have a series of “platinum stores” that will focus on an “immersive shopping experience” to attract younger shoppers.

  • Hudson’s Bay court monitor says landlords shouldn’t be forced to accept Ruby Liu as tenant
  • Hudson’s Bay is now just a numbered company as it continues to sell its assets to repay creditors