The Court declined to permit the successful plaintiff in an oppression proceeding to withhold estimated costs from the buy-out consideration, holding that the buy-out order must reflect the terms of the plaintiff's own open offer without modification. The Court also declined to award indemnity costs from the date of either of two Calderbank offers, finding that both offers proposed what was in substance capitulation by the defendants with only slight compromise on costs, and that the defendants lacked sufficient information (particularly as to property valuation and quantum of costs) to assess whether the offers represented a genuine compromise relative to the likely outcome. A walk-away offer on costs can constitute sufficient compromise for Calderbank purposes, but the extent of the compromise must be assessed against the overall economic position, and an offer providing little net benefit to the offeree may reasonably be rejected.
The full text is available to signed-in members.