header-logo header-logo

Part 36: a welcome return to simplicity?

15 August 2019 / Joel Douglas
Issue: 7853 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Post-JLE, parties wishing to escape Part 36 consequences should once again find this an exceptionally daunting task, says Joel Douglas

  • While no rule should be without exceptions, the ‘formidable obstacle’ of the injustice test has been re-affirmed.

The Provisions of the Civil Procedure Rules are rarely straight forward and without controversy. Many provisions of the CPR require complex Practice Directions, numerous judicial decisions and various amendments through the years in order that practitioners can be relatively confident that they are applying the provisions correctly. However, the provisions of Part 36, as far as Civil Procedure Rules go, appear relatively straightforward.

For claimants, providing the formalities of CPR 36.5 are met the consequences are clear.

Equal or better your offer at assessment pursuant to CPR 36.17 (1)(b) and, unless the court considers it unjust to make such an award, become entitled to:

  • interest on the whole or part of any sum of money at a rate not exceeding 10% above base rate (36.17 (4)(a));
  • costs on the indemnity
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

DWF—Jenny Leonard

DWF—Jenny Leonard

Former Metropolitan Police director joins police, care and justice team

Charles Russell Speechlys—Ed Morgan

Charles Russell Speechlys—Ed Morgan

Corporate real estate and funds expertise expands with partner hire

Hill Dickinson—Helen Foley, Charlotte Fallon & Gary Parnell

Hill Dickinson—Helen Foley, Charlotte Fallon & Gary Parnell

Firm grows London business services team with trio of partner hires

NEWS
AlphaBiolabs has made a £500 donation to Sean’s Place, a men’s mental health charity based in Sefton, as part of its ongoing Giving Back initiative
Human rights lawyers, social justice champion, co-founder of the law firm Bindmans, and NLJ columnist Sir Geoffrey Bindman KC has died at the age of 92 years
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll