The defendants and third party brought a motion for security for costs against the plaintiff, who ordinarily resides in India following a slip and fall incident in Ontario.
The plaintiff opposed the motion, claiming impecuniosity and relying on an adverse costs protection insurance policy.
The court found the plaintiff's evidence of impecuniosity insufficient and held that the insurance policy did not provide adequate security for the defendants due to its numerous exclusions and misrepresentations in the application.
The court ordered the plaintiff to post $7,500 in security for the defendants' costs but dismissed the third party's request, as the plaintiff had not sued the third party.
