The defendants brought motions for security for costs against the plaintiff, who was suing for negligent investigation and malicious prosecution.
The plaintiff argued he was impecunious and that an order would deny him access to justice.
The court found the plaintiff was impecunious but that his claim was almost certain to fail because the underlying criminal proceedings did not terminate in his favour (he pleaded guilty to two charges).
The court ordered the plaintiff to post security for costs, but reduced the amount sought by the defendants to avoid blocking access to the courts, ordering $15,000 to each set of defendants payable in instalments.
