Steen v Senton

In *Steen v Senton*, the appellant sought to re-open an appeal to address a specific ground concerning costs, which had been previously dismissed. The appeal itself concerned substantive matters that had been heard by a three-member Court of Appeal.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether it had the jurisdiction to re-open a perfected appeal to consider a specific ground relating to costs, particularly after the substantive appeal had been determined. A secondary issue, which arose in the context of the costs dispute, concerned the reasonableness of a *Calderbank* offer, and whether its reasonableness should be assessed at the time it was made.

The Court determined that it did not have the jurisdiction to re-open a perfected appeal to consider ground 6.4. The judges reasoned that once appeal orders are perfected, the Court's jurisdiction to alter them is generally limited, and the circumstances presented did not warrant such an exceptional intervention. Regarding the *Calderbank* offer, the Court affirmed the principle that the reasonableness of such an offer is to be assessed as at the time it was made, not with the benefit of hindsight.

Consequently, the Court refused the application to re-open the appeal to deal with ground 6.4 and made no order as to the costs of the proceedings after 6 November 2015.