Court orders security for costs against advisor in law firm suit
The firm asked the court for security for costs, arguing the plaintiff wouldn’t be able to pay if her case failed. Justice Marion agreed. He called her claim against the firm relatively weak and pointed out she already owes the firm at least $29,360 from earlier cost awards she hasn’t paid. He ordered her to post $20,000 within two months if she wants to pursue a related summary judgment application, then a further $30,000 before the case can move toward discovery – well short of the $150,000 to $245,000 the firm had asked for.
The ruling also raised a credibility problem. The plaintiff’s sworn affidavit cited three cases to argue the application had come too soon, but the judge found none of them held up – the citation numbers actually led to unrelated rulings, including two criminal cases. Justice Marion said the fabricated citations were “particularly problematic and calls into question the reliability of her affidavit evidence generally.” She was also declared a vexatious litigant by the Federal Court back in 2025.
Justice Marion turned down the plaintiff’s request for roughly $200,000 in advanced costs to help pay for the litigation – she hadn’t met the legal bar for that kind of funding. He also declined to approve her bid for more records from the firm and the insurer, calling it unsupported and premature.
The takeaway for wealth professionals: courts won’t let a weak claim drag on just because the plaintiff has nothing to lose, and a sworn affidavit full of invented case law can sink a litigant’s credibility fast.
