The Full Court refused permission to appeal a security for costs order, confirming that while impecuniosity alone is insufficient to order security against a natural person, additional factors such as a history of multiple proceedings, prior bankruptcies (particularly one founded on a costs order), and a probable disproportion between damages and litigation costs can justify such an order. The Court also held that the complexity of potential costs recovery proceedings against an elderly co-plaintiff was a sufficient basis for ordering security against her.
The full text is available to signed-in members.