A court cannot order security for costs under UCPR r 42.21(e) on the basis that a plaintiff is suing for another's benefit where the court has itself found the plaintiff lacks standing to pursue the claim on that person's behalf — the very basis for the order is undermined. The threshold for inability to pay under r 42.21(e) is 'reason to believe', not the lower standard of 'reasonably possible'. Unpaid interlocutory costs orders should not be treated as evidence of inability to pay without considering that such costs do not become payable until the conclusion of proceedings under r 42.7(2). An order requiring security before a plaintiff can replead a struck-out claim may be premature where the basis for the security order may not apply to the repleaded claim.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.