Post by Jeffrey Turner Post by tony cooper
"No less favorable" means that the new offer must be as favorable as
the original offer. The problem with "as favorable" is that the
original offer may not have been favorable at all. "No less
favorable" allows that the second offer need not be favorable, but it
can't be worse than the original offer.
Tony, we're not talking two offers here. It's clearly a reference to the
rules about an offer to settle a court case (or a payment into court, which
is the same thing). This is why the comparison is between A's offer on the
one hand and the judgment of the court of the other.
If A makes an offer (on 1 April) to settle the litigation on the basis that
A will pay B x, then if B refuses that offer and eventually recovers x or
less-than-x, then a can ask to court to award the costs of the action from 1
April until the final determination - because B's pig-headedness has wasted
everyone's time and money. But if B recovers x+1, he is OK.
Post by Jeffrey Turner
And it leaves open the possibility that the judgment may be better than
the original offer. Read "as good or better than".