That does not mean that a litigant of limited means is sheltered from all of the consequences of litigating. The ability to pay may be relevant to the issue of the quantum or scale of costs, but not to another party's entitlement to costs; nor should it shield a party who has acted unreasonably: Izyuk v. Bilousov, 2011 ONSC 7476, para. 51. As Spence J. wrote in Peers v. Poupore, at para. 42: “ability to pay alone cannot - nor should it - override the other factors in [what is now r. 24(12)].
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.