header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
06 February 2015 / Alex Fox , Chris Hoyer-Millar
Issue: 7639 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , CPR
printer mail-detail

An offer you can’t refuse?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
millarfox

Calderbank offers & Pt 36 offers are examined by Chris Hoyer-Millar & Alex Fox

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Recent judgments have drawn attention to the “failures” of parties (and their advisers) to curb costs and reach settlement. Why did X embark on a doomed case at vast and irrecoverable expense? Why did Y leave disclosure until the last minute thereby causing costs to rocket? Why did Z not accept an offer to settle which it could never realistically hope to beat? Of course in the heat of battle, matters are rarely clear cut.

However two recent cases provide guidance as to the court’s developing approach to two potentially problematic areas which crop up time and again: Without Prejudice Save As To Costs Offers (Calderbank Offers) and Part 36 Offers . The Court of Appeal decision (concerning Calderbank offers) is perhaps clearer than the more nuanced (and very fact specific) judgment of the Commercial Court (concerning an “unsuccessful” defendant’s Pt 36 offer).

Coward v Phaestos

The first case, Coward

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
Taylor Rose—Jessica Draganescu & Emily Hewlett

Taylor Rose—Jessica Draganescu & Emily Hewlett

Firm strengthens growth strategy and group litigation capability with senior hires

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Is inequality undermining trust?
The legal profession’s claim to be a ‘guardian of fairness’ is under scrutiny after stark findings on gender imbalance and opaque progression. Writing in NLJ this week, Joshua Purser of No5 Barristers’ Chambers and Govindi Deerasinghe of Global 50/50 warn that leadership remains dominated by a narrow elite, with men holding 71% of top court roles
NLJ this week: Freemasons ruling backs police transparency over privacy claims
A legal challenge to police disclosure rules has failed, reinforcing a push for transparency in policing. In NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth examines a case where the Metropolitan Police required officers to declare membership of groups like the Freemasons
NLJ this week: Right to grieve marks ‘major shift’ in employment law
Bereavement leave is undergoing a quiet but profound transformation. Writing in NLJ this week, Robert Hargreaves of York St John University explains how the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a day-one right to leave for a wider range of losses, alongside new provisions for pregnancy loss and bereaved partners
NLJ this week: AI privilege battles expose risks
Courts are beginning to grapple with whether AI-generated material is legally privileged—and the answers are mixed. In this week's issue of NLJ, Stacie Bourton, Tom Whittaker & Beata Kolodziej of Burges Salmon examine US rulings showing how easily privilege can be lost
NLJ this week: Experts warned—AI use must be transparent
New guidance seeks to bring order to the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Minesh Tanna and David Bridge of Simmons & Simmons set out a framework stressing ‘transparency’, ‘explainability’ and ‘reliability’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll