An offer of compromise stated to be 'plus costs' is not a valid offer of compromise under UCPR r 20.26, following Whitney v Dream Developments. Where a defendant serves a schedule of damages but makes no admission that the plaintiff is entitled to the minimum amount stated, and the defendant ultimately contends for a lesser amount at trial, the schedule does not constitute an 'admission' that would shift the costs event. A party who conducts a trial on an express factual basis cannot resile from that position in post-hearing written submissions without applying to re-open.
The full text is available to signed-in members.