Insurance And Reinsurance Weekly Update - 7 October 2014
|Author:||Mr Nigel Brook|
|Profession:||Clyde & Co|
Welcome to the thirty-sixth edition of Clyde & Co's (Re)insurance and litigation caselaw weekly updates for 2014
A summary of recent developments in insurance, reinsurance and litigation law.
This week's caselaw
Coward v Phaestos
A case on Calderbank offers and whether an offer must be beaten in monetary terms.
Calderbank offers and whether an offer must be beaten in monetary terms.
After the claimant lost at trial, he argued that costs should not be awarded against him because the defendant had recovered no more than it would have done had it accepted the claimant's earlier Calderbank offer. The judge at first instance held that the defendant had done significantly better at trial and the Court of Appeal agreed with that decision. In reaching that conclusion, it also held that although the Calderbank offer was in terms which were capable of acceptance, so as to give rise to a contract, the judge was nevertheless entitled to consider whether an offeree acting reasonably would have required further clarification before considering whether to accept the offer.
A further point which the Court of Appeal considered was whether CPR r36.14(1A) applied by analogy to the Calderbank offer. CPR r36.14(1A) provides that a claimant obtains a "more advantageous" judgment than its offer where, if it is a money claim, it does "better in money terms by any amount, however small". The defendant had sought to argue that the same approach should apply in all cases where there has been an offer to settle, whether under Part 36 or in...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL