Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Calderbank offers
COST BITES 147: WHO IS THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY? WHAT SUMS SHOULD BE DEDUCTED FOR LOSING ON CERTAIN POINTS?  DOES A CALDERBANK OFFER MATTER?

COST BITES 147: WHO IS THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY? WHAT SUMS SHOULD BE DEDUCTED FOR LOSING ON CERTAIN POINTS? DOES A CALDERBANK OFFER MATTER?

April 17, 2024 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In South Tees Development Corporation & Anor v PD Teesport Ltd [2024] EWHC 842 (Ch) Mr Justice Rajah determined issues relating to the costs of an action where the defendant had been largely successful.  A Calderbank offer from the Defendant,…

TRIALS ON PRELIMINARY ISSUES, CALDERBANK OFFERS AND COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REJECT SUBMISSION THAT "WOULD REPRESENT THE ANTITHESIS OF GOOD POLICY" & "REWARD BAD BEHAVIOUR"

TRIALS ON PRELIMINARY ISSUES, CALDERBANK OFFERS AND COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REJECT SUBMISSION THAT “WOULD REPRESENT THE ANTITHESIS OF GOOD POLICY” & “REWARD BAD BEHAVIOUR”

November 29, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In the judgment in  McKeown v Langer [2021] EWCA Civ 1792 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that a Calderbank offer had the same effect as a Part 36 offer when a court was considering the issue of costs…

ACCEPTING AN OFFER DURING A HEARING: CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES, NOT PART 36, APPLY: OFFER DID NOT LAPSE AT THE DOOR OF THE COURT

ACCEPTING AN OFFER DURING A HEARING: CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES, NOT PART 36, APPLY: OFFER DID NOT LAPSE AT THE DOOR OF THE COURT

May 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

Offers of settlement can, and often are, made outside the ambit of Part 36.  In MEF v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust [2020] EWHC 1300 (QB) Mr Justice Morris considered issues relating to late acceptance of offers.  The case shows…

AN ATTEMPT TO LIMIT COSTS MAKES A CALDERBANK OFFER INEFFECTIVE

March 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Burrell -v- Clifford [2016] EWHC 578 (Ch) Mr R Spearman QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) decided that an offer which was equivalent to the sum awarded in damages was not effective because the defendant also…

A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER DOES NOT ATTRACT INDEMNITY COSTS: GULATI -v- MGN

June 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Gulati -v- MGN [2015] EWHC 1805 (Ch) Mr Justice Mann considered whether indemnity costs should be awarded in circumstances where a Part 36 offer was withdrawn in one case and a “Calderbank” offer made in the other. KEY POINTS…

CALDERBANK OFFER HAD NO EFFECT ON OUTCOME IN RELATION TO COSTS:

October 2, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Damages, Members Content

Some parties make “Calderbank” offers in place of Part 36 offers. The effect of a Calderbank offer and whether it should affect an order for costs was considered by the Court of Appeal today in Coward -v- Phaesetos [2014] EWCA…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF EVER DONE FOR US? WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS: TEN KEY POINTS
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WAIVING LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE BY MENTIONING IT IN A WITNESS STATEMENT
  • PROPORTIONALITY AND LITIGATION (2): WHERE DOES IT ALL START TO GO WRONG? (AND HOW DO YOU AVOID IT?)
  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF EVER DONE FOR US? PERSONAL INJURY INJURY LAWYERS AND ISSUES OF LIABILITY
  • THE SRA CANNOT COMPEL A SOLICITOR TO DISCLOSE A CLIENT’S PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS: THE FUNDAMENTAL IMPORTANCE OF LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE

Top Posts

WHEN CHAT GPT DRAFTED A "SKELETON" ARGUMENT - 300 PAGES AND 132,000 WORDS LONG: THE LITIGANT RETAINS RESPONSIBILITY AND MUST COMPLY WITH THE RULES
COST BITES 455: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY ON WHETHER A CLIENT IS ENTITLED TO RAISE PART 18 QUESTIONS AS TO WHETHER THE SOLICITOR OBTAINED COMMISSION ON AN ATE PREMIUM
COST BITES 456: LET US ALL REMEMBER THAT THE DISPUTE THAT REACHED THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY WAS OVER THE PRINCELY SUM OF £25: "THE CLIENT HAS NEVER HAD ANY REAL ECONOMIC INTEREST IN THE PURSUIT OF THIS COSTLY LITIGATION"
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WAIVING LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE BY MENTIONING IT IN A WITNESS STATEMENT
ADVISING THE CLIENT OF THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: TEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS COUPLED WITH THE RELEVANT LINKS

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.