Senton v Steen

In the case of Senton v Steen, the plaintiff sought damages for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. The trial resulted in a damages award, which was subsequently reduced for contributory negligence. Prior to the trial, the plaintiff made a Calderbank offer to settle for an amount lower than the final award. The court was required to determine the appropriate costs order in light of this offer.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the plaintiff's solicitors were entitled to solicitor-and-client costs from the date the Calderbank offer expired. The plaintiff did not provide evidence of the terms of the retainer agreement with their solicitors, which made it difficult to ascertain the basis on which the solicitors were to be compensated. The court had to balance the principles of costs in personal injury cases against the procedural fairness in making a costs order.

The court determined that due to the absence of evidence regarding the terms of the retainer, it was not possible to ascertain whether the plaintiff's solicitors were entitled to solicitor-and-client costs. Therefore, the court ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs on a party-and-party basis up until the date the Calderbank offer expired. From that date onward, the plaintiff's costs were to be paid on a solicitor-and-client basis. This decision was made to ensure that the plaintiff was not disadvantaged by the lack of evidence regarding the retainer agreement.

The final orders of the court mandated that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs up to 28 January 2009 on a party-and-party basis and from 29 January 2009 on a solicitor-and-client basis. This approach balanced the need for procedural fairness with the principles governing costs in personal injury cases.