Thus in this case, the plaintiff would be entitled to substantial indemnity costs for its claim as a result of its rule 49.10 offer but not entitled to such an elevated award for the counterclaim because of the principles enunciated in Davies v. Clarington. While some may contend that it is impractical, if not unworkable, for there to be such a distinction, particularly when the offer is made by a party who is both a plaintiff and defendant by counterclaim, it appears driven by the language of the rule and the interpretation of the rule made in Davies v. Clarington.
"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.