This was an Application for permission to appeal under Rule 14.5(1)(b). The Applicant, Claire Bonville, sought to challenge a Chambers Judge’s Order staying her litigation against President’s Choice Financial and requiring her to explain why she should not be ordered to post $10,000 as Security for Costs. The Chambers Judge subsequently ordered Security for Costs, and upon Ms. Bonville’s failure to comply, struck her pleadings and granted Judgment on the Counterclaim. She did not appeal those later decisions.

The Court of Appeal held that, to obtain permission under Rule 14.5(1)(b), an applicant must raise an arguable point of significance to the practice or proceeding and demonstrate a reasonable chance of success. The Court found that Ms. Bonville’s litigation was without legal foundation, her reliance on the Consumer Protection Act and associated regulation was misplaced, and her allegations had no legislative support. The Court concluded that the proposed appeal raised no arguable issues, was moot, and had no reasonable prospect of success.

The Application for permission to appeal was dismissed, and costs of $2,000 were awarded against Ms. Bonville.