header-logo header-logo

30 March 2007 / Nicholas Bevan
Issue: 7266 / Categories: Features , Public , Profession , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Offers to settle

Nicholas Bevan considers the changes to PT36 in his second article on the 44th update to the CPR

The Civil Procedure (Amendment No 3) Rules 2006 (SI 2006/3435) introduce two completely re-written sections to the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR). Parts 36 and 37 come into effect on 6 April 2007. They replace the existing rules governing offers and payments into court. An important objective behind this reform is to simplify the provisions for making Pt 36 offers. Offers to settle are governed by the new Pt 36. The new Pt 37 has nothing to do with offers to settle. It is short and limited to regulating payments into court under a court order or where a defendant wishes to raise a defence of tender.

The Advanced Guidance Notice issued by the Department for Constitutional Affairs sets out the principles underlying the reform of Pts 36 and 37:

“[They] are amended to incorporate provisions for removing the requirement for defendants to make an offer to settle money claims in the form of a payment into court.

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

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll