Case Overview: Kim N. I. Bell sued Vinking Marine Enterprises Inc. for unpaid consultancy services, claiming two debts: $199,492.41 and $131,198.65. Vinking argued that the claims were time-barred and applied to strike the Statement of Claim under Rule 14.24(1)(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court, 1986, arguing that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.

Key Legal Issues:

• Statute of Limitations: Vinking contended that Bell’s claims were barred by the Limitations Act, which sets a six-year limit to bring an action to recover a debt.
• Test for Striking Out a Claim: The court applied the stringent test that a claim should only be struck out if it is "plain and obvious" that it cannot succeed.

Court's Findings:

• Debt A: Bell’s claim related to consultancy services ending on July 31, 2013, with shares issued as compensation, which were later canceled. The claim was found to be outside the six-year limitation period, expiring on July 31, 2019.
• Debt B: Related to services performed until January 1, 2014, with the claim expiring on January 1, 2020. This too was outside the limitation period.
• Limitation Period and Extensions: The court found no basis for extending the limitation period under sections related to discoverability or disability.

Decision: The court struck out Bell’s Statement of Claim as it was time-barred and disclosed no reasonable cause of action. Bell was ordered to pay Vinking’s costs, taxed on Column 3 of the Scale of Costs. The specific monetary amount was not determined in the judgment