header-logo header-logo

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

Civil Way: 11 December 2020

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

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll