header-logo header-logo

14 January 2016 / Emily Hillson
Issue: 7682 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs , CPR , Jackson , Part 36
printer mail-detail

Change management

nlj_7682_hilson

Need to change your Pt 36 offer? Emily Hillson provides guidance

Before even thinking of changing a Pt 36 offer I suggest you wrap a cold towel around your head. I hope that the cold towel and this article will help you understand the effects of changing a Pt 36 after the relevant period, the factors that should be taken into account when deciding whether to change an offer, and how to respond to an offer that has been changed.

Changing a Pt 36 offer after the relevant period

The effects of changing a Pt 36 offer differ depending on whether the offer is changed to make the terms more or less advantageous to the offeree. The differences can be illustrated by the following two scenarios. The backdrop to each is that a litigant has previously made a Pt 36 offer which relates to the whole of the claim, but developments in the case mean that the offer is now

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

Senior appointments in insurance services and commercial services announced

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Aviation disputes practice strengthened by London partner hire

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Residential property lawyer promoted to partnership

NEWS
he abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll