Shah v. Loblaw Companies Ltd, 2015 ONSC 5987
Released October 6, 2015 | Full Decision [CanLII]
Following his slip and fall at a Loblaw store in 2012, the Plaintiff moved to India. The Defendants brought a motion for security for costs. In response, the plaintiff obtained a Legal Protection Certificate and Indemnity Agreement, and argued that it was sufficient security for the defendants. The Court rejected this argument because the policy contained a number of exclusions, which would make the cost protection invalid. For example, if the plaintiff were to reject his own counsel’s recommendation to accept an offer to settle or if he chose to represent himself at trial, the exclusions would apply. The defendants did not have control over the policy or terms, and therefore may not have any security in the event of an adverse cost award against the plaintiff.