header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
02 August 2024 / Jack Ridgway
Issue: 8082 / Categories: Features , Profession , Dispute resolution
printer mail-detail

Part 36: Does justice have a price?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
184265
Jack Ridgway shares his reflections on the significance of Hugh Grant’s (reluctant) acceptance of a Pt 36 offer
  • The importance of Pt 36.
  • The consequences of failing to beat Pt 36.
  • The role of Pt 36 where money is not the driving factor in the litigation.

The world of legal costs and celebrity rarely interact, yet in the past few years we have had legal costs enter the public consciousness on two occasions: the infamous ‘Wagatha Christie’ saga (‘Welcome to the jungle (Pt 2)’, 169 NLJ 7868, p15), and more recently (in April) Hugh Grant (‘The insider’, NLJ, 17 May 2024, p7). While Coleen Rooney had her day in court, Hugh Grant (pictured) has cast the spotlight on legal costs for a very different reason—Pt 36.

While some sympathy can be felt for an individual who feels wronged and has not ‘had their day’ in court, it should be remembered that Hugh Grant has received damages without going to trial in several libel claims, going

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll