The Appellant appealed a Master’s Order requiring the payment of Security for Costs into Court.

Burrows J. noted the factors that the Court must take into consideration when granting an Order for Security for Costs, as enumerated under Rule 4.22: (1) whether it is likely the Applicant will be able to enforce an Order or Judgment against assets in Alberta; (2) the ability of the Respondent to pay the Costs Award; (3) the merits of the Action; (4) whether an Order to give Security for payment of a Costs Award would unduly prejudice the Respondent’s ability to continue the Action; and (5) any other matter the Court considers appropriate.

When considering the factors, Burrows J. noted in particular that while the Appellant was not a wealthy man, he did have assets in Alberta and made a reasonable living, and therefore Justice Burrows held that the first two factors did not provide a strong reason for granting an Order for Security for Costs. Justice Burrows also discussed the difficulty of assessing the merits of the underlying Action. His Lordship highlighted certain gaps in the materials before the Court and concluded that it was not clear that the Appellant’s underlying claim in defamation was without merit. Finally, Burrows J. concluded that requiring the Appellant to deposit Security for Costs should his claim not succeed would be unduly prejudicial to his ability to continue the Action.

Justice Burrows therefore allowed the Appeal.