What is the impact of a failure to accept an offer to settle?

Rule 18(14) speaks to the cost consequences of failing to accept offers to settle. The only offer to settle made in this proceeding was made by the respondent. Given that the offer was non-severable, the respondent’s suggestion that he was partially successful is not accepted; he took an “all or nothing” approach. After the motion was brought, it became clear that the monies used to purchase the Chatham property came from protected assets. Accordingly, the respondent should have consented to the order sought by the applicant in that regard. Instead, in his offer to settle, the respondent made his acceptance of that position contingent upon the applicant accepting all his positions with respect to the issues raised in his cross-motion. The respondent’s offer does not reflect a compromise and, therefore, will not play a material role in determining the quantum of costs: see Beaver v. Hill, 2018 ONCA 840, 143 O.R. (3d) 519 at para. 16.