2 total
Default judgment for non-consensual distribution of intimate images set aside on condition of paying costs.
The defendant brought a motion to set aside a default judgment awarding the plaintiff $100,000 in damages for the non-consensual posting of an intimate video.
Applying the five-factor test from Mountain View Farms, the court found that the interests of justice favoured setting aside the liability and damages portions of the judgment, as the defendant had an arguable defence regarding the quantum of damages and had moved relatively promptly.
The motion was granted on the condition that the defendant pay $10,000 in costs thrown away, while the permanent injunctions remained in place.
Security for costs denied where plaintiff showed assets and alleged defendant caused financial hardship.
The defendant trustee in bankruptcy moved for security for costs against a corporate plaintiff under Rule 56.01(d) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, alleging the plaintiff lacked sufficient assets in Ontario to satisfy a potential costs award.
The court held the defendant established good reason to believe the plaintiff had insufficient assets, triggering the second stage of the analysis.
However, the plaintiff demonstrated sufficient assets through equity in the shareholder’s condominium and ownership of moulds with significant value.
Alternatively, the court held that even if the plaintiff were impecunious, it would be unjust to order security for costs where the alleged wrongful conduct of the defendant contributed to the plaintiff’s financial circumstances and such an order could prevent the action from proceeding.
