Townsend v Townsend (No 2)

The case of *Townsend v Townsend (No 2)* concerned an application for special costs orders following an appeal. The appellant had been ordered to pay costs to the respondent, but sought to set off these costs against costs payable by the respondent to the appellant. The appeal itself had been decided by a majority.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether a *Calderbank* letter, sent by the respondent, was of such a nature as to warrant a special costs order in favour of the appellant. The appellant argued that the *Calderbank* letter, in substance, invited capitulation and that the appeal was arguable, as evidenced by the majority decision.

Giles JA determined that the *Calderbank* letter did not justify a special costs order. The court applied the principle that *Calderbank* offers are generally considered in the context of whether they have induced a party to abandon a claim or defence they might otherwise have pursued. In this instance, the appeal was found to be arguable, and the letter's content was not considered sufficiently unreasonable or oppressive to depart from the usual costs principles.

The respondent's application was dismissed with costs, and these costs were permitted to be set off against the costs payable by the appellant to the respondent.