ET v ROCKY MOUNTAIN PLAY THERAPY INSTITUTE INC, 2017 ABQB 475
4.22: Considerations for security for costs order
The Defendants applied for a Declaration that the self-represented Plaintiff was a vexatious litigant and for an Order requiring the Plaintiff to post Security for Costs.
With respect to the Order for Security for Costs, Hughes J. considered the factors set out in Rule 4.22 as well as the two-step test set out in Attila Dogan Construction & Installation Co v AMEC Americas Ltd, 2011 ABQB 175 (CanLII) which states that a Court must:
(1) Determine whether factors listed in Rule 4.22 “are weighted in favour of granting the application for security for costs”; and
(2) Determine whether, based on the factors in Rule 4.22, it is “just and reasonable to grant an application for security for payment of a costs award...”
Justice Hughes held that the factors in Rule 4.22 “clearly” weighed against the Plaintiff and that it was just and reasonable for the Court to grant the Order. Hughes J. specifically noted that the Plaintiff had: failed to pay outstanding Costs Awards; admitted an inability to pay future Costs; and presented no evidence of substantial assets in Alberta.
Justice Hughes granted the Defendants’ Application declaring the Plaintiff a vexatious litigant and the Order requiring the Plaintiff to post security for Costs.View CanLII Details