Defamations said to arise out of certain publications
Claims of intentional infliction of harm
Respondents sought security for costs
Quick Take
1Where a plaintiff's defamation and intentional infliction of harm claims are assessed as bound to fail or lacking reasonable prospects of success as pleaded, the usual countervailing weight given to impecuniosity in security for costs applications is diminished, because the chance of the plaintiff being shut out of successfully litigating is small.
2In ordering security for costs across multiple related proceedings brought by the same plaintiff, the court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction to stay each action until security is provided in all proceedings, even where the express terms of the relevant court rule may not clearly authorise such cross-action stays.
3In defamation proceedings, great care must be taken to avoid unjustly closing the door against a plaintiff striving to vindicate their reputation, but this consideration does not preclude a security order where the claims face obvious limitation, imputation and qualified privilege difficulties.
