A Calderbank letter is one factor relevant to the discretionary determination of costs but does not create a presumption or predisposition in favour of indemnity costs; the reasonableness of the offeree's rejection, the specificity of reasons in the letter, the stage of proceedings, and the content of the offer are all relevant. Under Rule 63.18, the prima facie obligation on a disputing party to pay costs of proof may be displaced where the challenge to documents was justified by the age, circumstances and inferential basis of their admission.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 20 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 20 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.