On a security for costs motion by one defendant, the court applied the two-step Rule 56.01 analysis after previously finding the plaintiffs had not established impecuniosity.
The moving party showed that the corporate plaintiff and estate trustee appeared to be ordinarily resident outside Ontario, that there was good reason to believe insufficient assets existed in Ontario to satisfy a costs order, and that the action against the moving party appeared frivolous and vexatious.
Because impecuniosity had not been proven, the plaintiffs were required to show a good chance of success, which they failed to do, particularly in light of the absence of any direct insurance policy and the evidence indicating the moving party was only a reinsurer.
Security for costs was therefore ordered in principle, with quantum and terms deferred.
