Appeal from order denying security for costs and granting directions for conduct of action dismissed.
The appellant appealed an order dismissing her motion for security for costs, authorizing the respondent to control the conduct of the intended action, and awarding costs to the respondent.
The Court of Appeal found no error in the motions judge's refusal to order security for costs, noting the action was neither vexatious nor frivolous.
The court also upheld the costs award and found the order for directions was a sensible interlocutory order authorized by the Canadian Business Corporations Act.
The appeal was dismissed.
Tony Coe v. Karen Meade, 2006 ONCA 17247
