Key Points:

1. Background:

   • Ms. Aubin alleged that a wall separating her unit from a lounge did not adequately block sound, breaching building code standards.
   • An applications judge found the condominium corporation had improperly conducted itself under section 67 of the Condominium Property Act, RSA 2000, c C-22. The corporation was directed to investigate the soundproofing and awarded Ms. Aubin 80% of her solicitor-client costs.
   • On appeal, the chambers judge reversed the decision, finding no improper conduct. Costs were awarded to the corporation instead.

2. Application:

   • The corporation sought security for costs, arguing:
     • Ms. Aubin’s appeal lacked merit.
     • She might be unable to pay costs if unsuccessful.

3. Court’s Decision:

   • Merits of Appeal: The court found Ms. Aubin's appeal neither frivolous nor vexatious, meeting the low threshold for merit.
   • Ability to Pay: While Ms. Aubin could incur debt to pay costs, she has steady employment and property assets, suggesting she could pay costs if necessary.
   • Prejudice: Requiring security for costs would not unduly prejudice Ms. Aubin's ability to proceed.
   • The condominium corporation failed to prove Ms. Aubin’s inability to pay or enforceability issues.

4. Outcome: The application for security for costs was dismissed. No final total monetary award/damages were determined in this specific decision.