In Chomos v. Hamilton, 2016 ONSC 6232, the court held that an offer to settle substantive terms, which also includes a pre-determination of costs, perverts the r. 18(14) analysis because the party ends up trying to claim credit for accurately predicting a costs determination a judge has not yet made. Rule 18(14) contemplates full indemnity for costs where all the terms of an offer have been obtained in the trial judgment. An offer which includes costs obligations not yet determined by the court cannot satisfy the strict requirements of this section.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.