The defendants brought a motion for security of costs against the plaintiff, an American actress residing in California with no assets in Ontario, who sued for injuries sustained from a dog bite on a film set.
The plaintiff opposed paying security into court, arguing that her After-The-Event (ATE) legal expenses insurance policy provided adequate protection for the defendants' costs.
The court held that the specific ATE policy, which covered costs up to the date of any cancellation and was supported by counsel's undertaking to advise of any policy suspension, was an adequate substitute for payment into court.
The court exercised its discretion to accept the ATE policy as security for costs.
