---
title: "Reply to a Calderbank offer in a personal injury claim"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/precedents/personal-injury-and-compensation/reply-to-calderbank-offer"
type: "precedent"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "a21-reply-to-calderbank-offer"
area_id: "A21"
kind: "letter"
ai_level: "yellow"
version: 1
task_ids: ["A5-LT20261023-2", "A21-T1-R13"]
law_stated_as_at: "2026-10-23"
---

# Reply to a Calderbank offer in a personal injury claim

> A reply to a Calderbank offer in a Victorian, Queensland or New South Wales personal injury claim. It identifies unclear terms and the time allowed, and in Victoria it uses the Hazeldene list only.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/precedents/personal-injury-and-compensation/reply-to-calderbank-offer  
Law stated as at: 2026-10-23

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

- Kind: Letter. A letter or email you adapt and send.
- Practice area: [Personal Injury & Compensation](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/personal-injury-and-compensation.md)
- Jurisdictions: Victoria, Queensland, New South Wales
- AI level: Yellow. You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
- Law stated as at: 2026-10-23
- Status: Maintained. Checked on 2026-10-23 against the authority it cites, for Victoria, Queensland and New South Wales.

## When to use it

Use when the other side has sent a without-prejudice offer and the plaintiff will reply without accepting it. The client approves any request for more time and any counter-offer. Delete the state paragraph that does not apply. This is not the plaintiff's own Calderbank letter.

## Used for these tasks

- [Check a Calderbank letter against the factors for an indemnity costs application](https://ailawframework.com/practice/commercial-litigation-and-dispute-resolution/check-a-calderbank-letter-against-the-factors-for-an-indemnity-costs-app.md)
- [Draft correspondence to the insurer or scheme agent](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/draft-correspondence-to-the-insurer-or-scheme-agent.md)

## How AI may be used

The tool may mark unclear terms and the time allowed on the offer that was received, and the lawyer decides the reply, including whether to ask for more time, before it is sent.

**AI may:**

- Quote the offer's amount, costs term, open period and any indemnity-costs sentence into the reply so the lawyer can see them
- List terms that are not clear, without proposing a new deal
- For a Victorian reply, set out the six Hazeldene matters at [25] as a checklist beside the offer
- Delete the optional counter-offer unless the client has approved it in writing

**AI must not:**

- Must not accept the offer, reject it as unreasonable, or put a counter-offer in the letter unless the lawyer has marked that instruction
- Must not treat the Hazeldene list as the Queensland or New South Wales test
- Must not describe this reply as an offer under the Victorian, Queensland or New South Wales court rules
- Must not add a case that was not opened for this reply

**The lawyer checks:**

- The client has seen the offer and has not instructed acceptance. Any counter-offer is a separate instruction
- In Victoria, Hazeldene [2005] VSCA 298 at [25] is the ordinary list, and the Court said the list is not exhaustive. The discretion takes account of all relevant matters
- The six matters are the stage of the proceeding, the time allowed, the extent of the compromise, the offeree's prospects at the date of the offer, the clarity of the terms, and whether an indemnity-costs application was foreshadowed
- No Queensland or New South Wales Calderbank case was opened. Do not put the Hazeldene list into those replies as if it were the test
- A rules offer is a different document. This reply does not answer an offer of compromise or an offer to settle under the rules unless the lawyer has identified it as one
- If a party is a child or under a legal incapacity, do not send an acceptance. The approval rule for this reply was not opened
- The letter stays out of a public tool while it is confidential. In the Supreme Court of Victoria, Practice Note SC GEN 25 paragraph 6.8 was opened. It is not applied to another court

## Authorities

- [Hazeldene's Chicken Farm Pty Ltd v Victorian WorkCover Authority (No 2) 2005 VSCA 298 at 25 (matters a Victorian court ordinarily considers when rejection of a Calderbank offer is said to have been unreasonable; the list is not exhaustive)](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/vic/VSCA/2005/298.html)

## Full text and drafting notes

The full text and the drafting notes are not part of this public page. Signed-in firm accounts can read them at https://ailawframework.com/precedents/personal-injury-and-compensation/reply-to-calderbank-offer and through the signed-in MCP connector https://ailawframework.com/mcp/firm.

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*