The appellants appealed an order requiring them to post $66,670 as security for costs pending the trial of their counterclaim.
The Court of Appeal raised the issue of jurisdiction, noting that orders for security for costs are interlocutory, not final.
The appellants argued the order was final in substance because they could not afford to pay it, which would end the litigation.
The Court of Appeal rejected this argument, holding that the legal nature of the order, not its practical effect, determines whether it is interlocutory or final.
The appeal was quashed for want of jurisdiction.