The defendants sought security for costs from the non-resident plaintiffs, Typhoon Offshore B.V. and Typhoon Capital B.V., arguing their claim was hybrid and not solely an oppression remedy.
The court found the plaintiffs' claim to be primarily related to oppression remedies (70%) but also included other relief such as constructive trust and claims under the Fraudulent Conveyances Act and Assignments and Preferences Act.
Despite the hybrid nature of the claim and the plaintiffs being non-resident with insufficient Ontario assets, the court exercised its broad discretion.
It found that the plaintiffs had a good chance of success, particularly given existing unpaid judgments against one of the defendants, Jacob Securities Inc., and the alleged oppressive conduct.
The motion for security for costs was dismissed, as it was deemed unjust to order security against plaintiffs seeking to enforce existing judgments.
