The defendants moved for an order requiring the plaintiff, who resides outside Ontario, to pay security for costs.
The plaintiff opposed, alleging impecuniosity and arguing that the defendants had deprived her of access to the accident site, preventing her from assessing liability.
The court dismissed the motion, finding it premature because the plaintiff had been denied the opportunity to investigate liability.
The court also found the plaintiff to be impecunious, noting that her financial disclosure was sufficient given her age, health, and limited income, and that requiring further evidence would be disproportionate.
