The District Court dismissed proceedings under UCPR r 42.21(3) where the plaintiff corporation failed to pay $80,000 in security for costs ordered over three and a half months earlier, had filed but not advanced a notice of intention to appeal the security order, and failed to appear at the hearing of the dismissal application. The Court applied the five Idoport factors (period elapsed, notice of dismissal application, inability to fund, prejudice to defendant, position of the Court) and found all weighed in favour of dismissal, notwithstanding that dismissal for non-compliance remains a 'radical step' that courts should strain to avoid where consistent with the interests of justice.
The full text is available to signed-in members.