A corporate plaintiff seeking to resist an order for security for costs on the basis that its impecuniosity was caused by the respondent must support that allegation with relatively straightforward and unambiguous evidence of a fairly compelling nature, and the respondent's conduct must be the material contributor to or cause of the impecuniosity. Where a director offers a personal guarantee, the guarantee must be substantiated as to its value; an unsubstantiated guarantee will not defeat an application for security. The fact that an order for security would stifle the litigation is a powerful but not determinative factor.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 23 later cases that cite this judgment.
5 of the 23 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.