Shawna Sosnovich

The moving party brought a motion for security for costs of an appeal under rule 61.06(1).

The responding party, who had made a consumer proposal in bankruptcy, was appealing a decision that refused to set aside a consent order converting a default judgment into a judgment in fraud.

The responding party argued he consented to the order due to his former solicitor's misunderstanding and failure to explain the consequences.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion, finding that although the responding party was impecunious, his appeal was not plainly devoid of merit and he should not be deprived of the opportunity to have his claim adjudicated.

The appellant appealed a judgment enforcing his personal guarantee of loans, arguing the loans had already been paid.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no palpable and overriding error in the motion judge's conclusion that the record did not support the appellant's claim of payment.