header-logo header-logo

26 November 2009 / Matt Mccahearty , Jonathan Pratt
Issue: 7395 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

How many bites of the cherry?

Matt McCahearty & Jonathan Pratt recommend keeping Pt 36 offers under review

The current Pt 36 rules, which came into effect on 6 April 2007, provide that Pt 36 offers remain open until expressly withdrawn but what happens when a Pt 36 offer is rejected?

Contract law clearly provides that when an offer is rejected, it lapses. What is less well established, however, is whether the same rule applies to the Pt 36 procedure. This issue was discussed in the recent case of Sampla and Others v (1) Rushmore Borough Council (2) Mr Timothy Crowley [2008] EWHC 2616 (TCC).

Rushmore Borough Council (RBC) and Mr Crowley were co-defendants to a claim, brought by Mr Sampla and others (the claimants). Mr Crowley settled the dispute with the claimants and sought to recover a contribution from RBC.

On 12 August 2008, Mr Crowley made a Pt 36 offer, in which he offered to accept from RBC a contribution of 20% towards both the settlement sum and the claimants’ costs. On 14

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