In response, the plaintiff submits, first, that the applicant on a Rule 18A hearing has a burden which is more onerous than that which his opponent must carry, and the task should not be made more difficult by the fear of having costs awarded against him if unsuccessful. Support for that argument is found in the decision of this court in Toronto-Dominion Bank v. Fortin (1978), 1 B.C.L.R. 224 at pp. 225-26, where it was held that an unsuccessful applicant under Rule 18 should not be mulcted in costs because, if he were, he might be dissuaded from making the application. Moreover, the court noted, success in opposing such an application does not guarantee success at trial.
"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.alexsei.com.