3 total
Foreign corporate plaintiff ordered to post security for costs after failing to prove impecuniosity.
The plaintiff, a Korean corporation, was the victim of a phishing scam and wired funds to an account controlled by the defendants.
The plaintiff sued multiple defendants for fraud and related claims.
Three groups of defendants moved for an order requiring the plaintiff to post security for costs under Rule 56.01(1).
The court found that the plaintiff was a foreign corporation with no assets in Ontario and failed to prove impecuniosity with robust evidence.
The court ordered the plaintiff to post security for costs in installments, totaling $210,000 across three phases.
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed with no costs due to missing Costs Outline.
The moving parties brought a motion for leave to appeal an order of D.E. Harris J. The Divisional Court dismissed the motion.
No costs were ordered because the responding party failed to file a Costs Outline.
The court awarded the successful applicant full recovery costs of $14,133.48 due to the respondent's bad faith failure to provide financial disclosure.
This endorsement addresses the costs of a motion for child and spousal support brought by Mona Ayesh against Abdelsalam Zeidan.
Ms. Ayesh was successful in obtaining support orders.
She sought costs on a substantial indemnity basis, while Mr. Zeidan claimed his own costs, arguing his offer to settle was more favourable.
The court found Ms. Ayesh was presumptively entitled to costs due to her success and Mr. Zeidan's unreasonable conduct, specifically his failure to provide full financial disclosure, which amounted to bad faith under the Family Law Rules.
Consequently, the court awarded Ms. Ayesh full recovery costs of $14,133.48, enforceable as child support.