The plaintiff brought a motion for leave to appeal an order requiring it to pay $175,000 into court as security for costs.
The underlying action involved a claim for damages for breach of a franchise agreement.
The motions judge had found that the plaintiff failed to establish impecuniosity.
The Divisional Court granted leave to appeal, finding good reason to doubt the correctness of the order and that the issue of whether the merits of the case should be considered even if impecuniosity is not established transcends the interests of the parties and involves conflicting decisions.
