Does a settlement offer "ought" to have been accepted under Rule 9-1(6)?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from Rising Star Learning (Kingsway) Ltd. v Kandola, 2018 BCSC 2180 (CanLII):

In light of the relationship between the terms of settlement and the award at trial, I am not satisfied that this offer “ought” to have been accepted within the meaning of Rule 9-1(6): See Norris v. Burgess, 2016 BCSC 1451, at paras. 40 to 42.

Other Questions


When is an offer not an offer that ought reasonably have been accepted? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a court have any authority or authority to award double costs for failure to accept an offer that ought to have been accepted? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can a formal settlement offer be revoked by an informal settlement offer? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can an informal settlement offer co-exist with a formal settlement offer? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for whether an offer was an offer that ought reasonably to have been accepted? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the burden of proving that a party making an offer to a prospective buyer of a dog is reasonable to expect that the offer ought to have been accepted? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the impact of reasonable settlement offers and the response of the litigants to settlement offers? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is there any case law where a party has been awarded double costs for failing to accept an offer that should have been accepted? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for an award of double costs for failing to accept an offer to settle that should have been accepted? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for whether an offer ought reasonably to have been accepted? (British Columbia, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.