When a judgment is varied on appeal and backdated, the comparison between an offer of compromise and the judgment for the purposes of r 42.14 must take into account interest that would have accrued to the date of the offer, by identifying the amount of a notional judgment including interest as at the offer date. An offer of compromise addressed to one party but expressed in terms requiring a different party to pay is ineffective against the addressee. Under r 42.14, the onus is on the party resisting indemnity costs to justify an order otherwise, and partial success on appeal is insufficient if the appellant would still have been better off accepting the offer.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.