header-logo header-logo

Civil Way: 11 December 2020

10 December 2020
Issue: 7914 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Civil way
printer mail-detail

Pt 36 is juicy: official; New debt moratoria; Waking up to a mistake; Beware whiplash reforms; Prepare for higher court fees

ALL OR NOTHING

A judgment which beats a Pt 36 offer bears four juicy fruits, unless that would be unjust. In Telefonica UK Ltd v The Office of Communications [2020] EWCA Civ 1374, [2020] All ER (D) 55 (Nov), the mobile network operating claimant seeking restitution of annual licence fees paid to Ofcom had made a pre-action Pt 36 offer for a cool £52.82m principal as against a judgment for over £54m, in which interest also figured. The judge awarded two of the fruits, to wit indemnity costs from 21 days after the offer and an additional amount at the capped £75,000. However, he decided against the other two enhancements of interest on the principal and the costs (above the agreed commercial rate of 2% over base) which cannot exceed 10% above base. In relation to enhanced interest on the principal award and the judge’s reasoning that such an award would have

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
back-to-top-scroll