Court weighs Liu's $450 million retail plan as landlords push redevelopment priorities
Canada’s largest pension funds are opposing Ruby Liu’s plan to revive 25 shuttered Hudson’s Bay Co. outlets, setting up a court battle over the leases that could determine the future of some of the country’s biggest malls.
Liu, who owns three shopping centres and a golf course in British Columbia, secured the leases in May with a commitment to pay $69m to Hudson’s Bay creditors and spend another $375m reopening the stores.
She also paid $6m for Hudson’s Bay locations at malls she already owned. Her goal to operate under the Hudson’s Bay name fell through when Canadian Tire Corp. acquired the trademarks, so she shifted to creating a new chain under her own name.
Bloomberg reported that landlords—including the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System, Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec, KingSett Capital Inc., and several real estate investment trusts—resisted her tenancy after a series of meetings.
They cited the absence of a detailed business plan and raised concerns about unrealistic targets for store repair budgets, six-to-12 month reopening timelines, and projected sales.
One Ontario Teachers’ executive testified in an affidavit that Liu refused to share her plan without a deal in place.
An Omers vice-president said she told them to “relax, lay back and do not worry” when asked about inventory.
Landlords also questioned her decision to propose a new brand, first called The New Bay before she settled on naming the chain Ruby Liu.
Bloomberg reported that social media posts and interviews deepened their doubts.
Liu suggested concepts such as subletting space for a “mall within a mall,” opening restaurants, and adding playgrounds or fitness studios — all of which they said conflicted with lease terms.
“Liu had no intention or capability of running a department store,” Ontario Teachers’ executive Rory MacLeod stated in court.
Liu countered that she made such remarks before formalizing her business plan and maintained that her court filings represented her true strategy.
She argued the real opposition came from landlords who preferred to redevelop the sites into housing or other projects.
Submissions noted that La Caisse and British Columbia Investment Management Corp. had previously paid Hudson’s Bay tens of millions to relax lease restrictions, and that both Ontario Teachers’ and Omers had already submitted redevelopment plans for four of the malls.
The court-appointed monitor advised against approving Liu’s bid, citing her lack of direct retail experience and warning another failure could damage mall owners further.
Liu responded that she is hiring executives, including former Hudson’s Bay staff, and a consultant to handle inventory. She said contracts could not reasonably be signed before the court’s decision.
In her filings, she said: “I would not have undertaken this process, expended the time and several million dollars that I have to date, committed my considerable wealth going forward, and proceeded despite the objections of the landlords if I was not fully prepared to fund this venture.”
Bloomberg reported that she said she had no intention of investing $400m into a business and then letting it fail.
The case returns to court Thursday, where the judge will decide whether Liu’s bid proceeds or the properties revert to landlords.
